Harmony search algorithm with adaptive parameter setting for solving large bin packing problems
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bin packing problem is a constrained optimization problem with a huge search space due to large combinations. Bin packing problem has a wide range of applications in multiple fields. This paper presents harmony search algorithm with different initialization and adaptive PAR strategies for solving bin packing problem. The proposed Harmony search (HS) variations tests two partial feasible initialization strategies for bin packing problem. The paper presents adaptive PAR strategies for better exploration and exploitation of HS algorithm. The PAR values are tuned in every iteration. Improved initialization strategy, population initialization after premature convergence and adaptive PAR leads to the better exploration of harmony search algorithm for bin packing problem. The performance of variations are tested over 120 benchmark instances with 100 and 200 objects with varying complexities. The results show that improved HS performs better than basic HS with respect to best, mean, convergence rate. The performance of algorithms is tested with varying harmony memory size and harmony memory considering rate. Results show that variation in these two parameter values has less effect on performance of improved versions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it