A<scp><i>Canis lupus</i></scp>inspired upgraded Harris hawks optimizer for nonlinear, constrained, continuous, and discrete engineering design problem
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
Abstract Recently established Harris hawks optimization (HHO) has natural behavior for finding an optimum solution in global search space without getting trapped in previous convergence. However, the exploitation phase of the current Harris hawks optimizer algorithm is poor. In the present research, an improved version of the HHO algorithm, which combines Harris hawks optimizer with Canis lupus inspire grey wolf optimizer (GWO) and named as hHHO‐GWO algorithm, has been proposed to find the solution of various optimization problems such as nonlinear, nonconvex, and highly constrained engineering design problem. In the proposed research, the phase of exploration and exploitation of the existing HHO algorithm has been further improved using GWO algorithm and its performance has been tested for various benchmarks problems including CEC2005 (unimodal, multimodal, and fixed dimensions functions), multimodal functions with variable dimensions, and CEC‐BC‐2017 test functions. Further, the developed hybrid optimizer has been tested for 11 different engineering design and optimization problems and experimental results of hHHO‐GWO have been compared with other optimizer.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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