MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197491224 · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2021.3105937

Multi-Objective Neural Evolutionary Algorithm for Combinatorial Optimization Problems

2021· article· en· W3197491224 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceKnapsack problemArtificial neural networkEvolutionary algorithmCombinatorial optimizationTravelling salesman problemScalabilityMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceHeuristicsOptimization problemInferenceAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been a recent surge of success in optimizing deep reinforcement learning (DRL) models with neural evolutionary algorithms. This type of method is inspired by biological evolution and uses different genetic operations to evolve neural networks. Previous neural evolutionary algorithms mainly focused on single-objective optimization problems (SOPs). In this article, we present an end-to-end multi-objective neural evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition and dominance (MONEADD) for combinatorial optimization problems. The proposed MONEADD is an end-to-end algorithm that utilizes genetic operations and rewards signals to evolve neural networks for different combinatorial optimization problems without further engineering. To accelerate convergence, a set of nondominated neural networks is maintained based on the notion of dominance and decomposition in each generation. In inference time, the trained model can be directly utilized to solve similar problems efficiently, while the conventional heuristic methods need to learn from scratch for every given test problem. To further enhance the model performance in inference time, three multi-objective search strategies are introduced in this work. Our experimental results clearly show that the proposed MONEADD has a competitive and robust performance on a bi-objective of the classic travel salesman problem (TSP), as well as Knapsack problem up to 200 instances. We also empirically show that the designed MONEADD has good scalability when distributed on multiple graphics processing units (GPUs).

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.243
Teacher spread0.229 · 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