MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293545793 · doi:10.3390/su141710673

White-Tailed Eagle Algorithm for Global Optimization and Low-Cost and Low-CO2 Emission Design of Retaining Structures

2022· article· en· W4293545793 on OpenAlexaff
Behdad Arandian, Amin Iraji, Hossein Alaei, Suraparb Keawsawasvong, Moncef L. Nehdi

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEagleBenchmark (surveying)MetaheuristicComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematical optimizationEvolutionary algorithmPosition (finance)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsGeographyEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposes a new metaheuristic optimization algorithm, namely the white-tailed eagle algorithm (WEA), for global optimization and optimum design of retaining structures. Metaheuristic optimization methods are now broadly implemented to address problems in a variety of scientific domains. These algorithms are typically inspired by the natural behavior of an agent, which can be humans, animals, plants, or any physical agent. However, a specific metaheuristic algorithm (MA) may not be able to find the optimal solution for every situation. As a result, researchers will aim to propose and discover new methods in order to identify the best solutions to a variety of problems. The white-tailed eagle algorithm (WEA) is a simple but effective nature-inspired algorithm inspired by the social life and hunting activity of white-tailed eagles. The WEA’s hunting is divided into two phases. In the first phase (exploration), white-tailed eagles seek prey inside the searching region. The eagle goes inside the designated space according to the position of the best eagle to find the optimum hunting position (exploitation). The proposed approach is tested using 13 unimodal and multimodal benchmark test functions, and the results are compared to those obtained by some well-established optimization methods. In addition, the new algorithm automates the optimum design of retaining structures under seismic load, considering two objectives: economic cost and CO2 emissions. The results of the experiments and comparisons reveal that the WEA is a high-performance algorithm that can effectively explore the decision space and outperform almost all comparative algorithms in the majority of the problems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207