MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138903388 · doi:10.18280/jesa.540105

Discretization of Emperor Penguins Colony Algorithms with Application to Modular Product Design

2021· article· en· W3138903388 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmperorModular designDiscretizationProduct (mathematics)Computer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsProgramming languageHistoryAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modularity concepts attracted the attention of many researchers as it plays an important role in product design problems. Modularity requires dividing a product into a set of modules that are independent between each other and dependent within. The product is represented using Design Structure Matrix (DSM). DSM works as a system representation tool; it visualizes the interrelationship between product elements. In this research, a comparison is conducted between four optimization algorithms: Emperor Penguins Colony (EPC), First Modified Emperor Penguins Colony (MEPC1), Second Modified Emperor Penguins Colony (MEPC2) and Cuckoo Search (CS) optimization algorithms. These four algorithms aim at finding the optimal number of clusters and the optimal assignment of components to clusters, with the objective of minimizing the total coordination cost. Experimental results show that EPC outperforms the other three algorithms.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.211 · 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