MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224280865 · doi:10.18280/rces.090103

An Insight Review on Jellyfish Optimization Algorithm and Its Application in Engineering

2022· article· en· W4224280865 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

VenueReview of Computer Engineering Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAlgorithmMetaheuristicOptimization problemSegmentationData miningMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Present paper conducts the study on metaheuristic jellyfish optimization algorithm and reviews work done on it. This is a newly developed meta-heuristic optimization algorithm concentrates on movements of jellyfish in ocean such as search of food in sea current, motion inside swarm, bloom, etc. The optimization demonstrates higher and additional favourable results versus other bio-inspired optimization algorithms. Some of the work is discussed in this paper are: finding of unknown parameters of Photo Voltic models using premature convergence strategy, finding of optimal VAR coordination in Automated Delivery System, estimating the parameters of single-phase power transformers, overcoming the drawbacks and improving the quality of network service, tracking the overall maximum power point under partial shade conditions, improving MapReduce job performance and increasing resource usage in Hadoop yarn, solving engineering problems optimally with multiple objectives, dimensionally reducing humanoid application feature, solving the problems to identify the parameters of Polymer Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell models, watermark extraction process and preserving location confidentiality to avoid congestion with less guaranteed delay, OPNN network planning to categorise plant diseases, Brain image segmentation method and multiple radio access network. All the above work reviewed shows promising results from the algorithm. More work can be conducted using this algorithm in future.

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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.239 · 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