MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976813994 · doi:10.1109/iccse.2019.8845065

Differential Evolution Algorithm Based on a Competition Scheme

2019· article· en· W2976813994 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)CrossoverDifferential evolutionCompetition (biology)Mathematical optimizationMutationAlgorithmComputer sciencePopulationScheme (mathematics)MathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Differential Evolution (DE) is a simple yet powerful population-based metaheuristic algorithm to solve global optimization problems. In this paper, a novel differential evolution is proposed based on the competition among candidate solutions. In the proposed algorithm, the candidate solutions are divided into two groups including losers and winners based on a competition among candidate solutions. Winners generate new candidate solutions based on the DE's standard mutation and crossover operators, whereas losers learn from the winners. To this end, both crossover and mutation are changed for the loser ones. Competition is not performed in each iteration. In this regard, a new control parameter representing the competition period is introduced. We assess the performance of the proposed algorithm on CEC2017 benchmark functions with three dimensions of 30, 50, and 100. The experimental results verify the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm on the majority of the benchmark functions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it