Adaptive Salp Swarm Algorithm for Optimization of Geotechnical Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on the salp swarm algorithm (SSA), this paper proposes an efficient metaheuristic algorithm for solving global optimization problems and optimizing two commonly encountered geotechnical engineering structures: reinforced concrete cantilever retaining walls and shallow spread foundations. Two new equations for the leader- and followers-position-updating procedures were introduced in the proposed adaptive salp swarm optimization (ASSA). This change improved the algorithm’s exploration capabilities while preventing it from converging prematurely. Benchmark test functions were used to confirm the proposed algorithm’s performance, and the results were compared to the SSA and other effective optimization algorithms. A Wilcoxon’s rank sum test was performed to evaluate the pairwise statistical performances of the algorithms, and it indicated the significant superiority of the ASSA. The new algorithm can also be used to optimize low-cost retaining walls and foundations. In the analysis and design procedures, both geotechnical and structural limit states were used. Two case studies of retaining walls and spread foundations were solved using the proposed methodology. According to the simulation results, ASSA outperforms alternative models and demonstrates the ability to produce better optimal solutions.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".