MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095288545 · doi:10.1115/detc2020-22519

Enhanced Particle Swarm Optimization via Reinforcement Learning

2020· article· en· W3095288545 on OpenAlex
Di Wu, G. Gary Wang

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 institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationReinforcement learningConvergence (economics)Mathematical optimizationMulti-swarm optimizationComputer scienceSwarm behaviourFunction (biology)Optimization problemRate of convergenceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Particle swarm optimization (PSO) method is a well-known optimization algorithm, which shows good performance in solving different optimization problems. However, PSO usually suffers from slow convergence. In this paper, a reinforcement learning method is used to enhance PSO in convergence by replacing the uniformly distributed random number in the updating function by a random number generated from a well-selected normal distribution. The mean and variance of the normal distribution are estimated from the current state of each individual through a policy net. The historic behavior of the swarm group is learned to update the policy net and guide the selection of parameters of the normal distribution. The proposed algorithm is tested with numerical test functions and the results show that the convergence rate of PSO can be improved with the proposed Reinforcement Learning method (RL-PSO).

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.245 · 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