Golf Optimization Algorithm: A New Game-Based Metaheuristic Algorithm and Its Application to Energy Commitment Problem Considering Resilience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this research article, we uphold the principles of the No Free Lunch theorem and employ it as a driving force to introduce an innovative game-based metaheuristic technique named Golf Optimization Algorithm (GOA). The GOA is meticulously structured with two distinctive phases, namely, exploration and exploitation, drawing inspiration from the strategic dynamics and player conduct observed in the sport of golf. Through comprehensive assessments encompassing fifty-two objective functions and four real-world engineering applications, the efficacy of the GOA is rigorously examined. The results of the optimization process reveal GOA's exceptional proficiency in both exploration and exploitation strategies, effectively striking a harmonious equilibrium between the two. Comparative analyses against ten competing algorithms demonstrate a clear and statistically significant superiority of the GOA across a spectrum of performance metrics. Furthermore, the successful application of the GOA to the intricate energy commitment problem, considering network resilience, underscores its prowess in addressing complex engineering challenges. For the convenience of the research community, we provide the MATLAB implementation codes for the proposed GOA methodology, ensuring accessibility and facilitating further exploration.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".