An investigation of the effects of chaotic maps on the performance of metaheuristics
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 This article presents an empirical investigation of the effects of chaotic maps on the performance of metaheuristics. Particle Swarm Optimization and Simulated Annealing are modified to use chaotic maps instead of the traditional pseudorandom number generators and then compared on five common benchmark functions using nonparametric null hypothesis statistical testing. Contrary to what has often been assumed, results show that chaotic maps do not generally appear to increase the performance of swarm metaheuristics in a statistically significant way, except possibly for noisy functions. No performance differences were observed with the single‐state Simulated Annealing algorithm. Finally, it is shown that sequence effects may be responsible for the observed performance increase. These findings reveal new research directions in using chaotic maps for metaheuristics research. The MATLAB code used in this article is available in a GitHub repository for suggestions and/or corrections.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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