A Framework for Meta-heuristic Parameter Performance Prediction Using Fitness Landscape Analysis and Machine Learning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The behaviour of an optimization algorithm when attempting to solve a problem depends on the values assigned to its control parameters. For an algorithm to obtain desirable performance, its control parameter values must be chosen based on the current problem. Despite being necessary for optimal performance, selecting appropriate control parameter values is time-consuming, computationally expensive, and challenging. To predict the performance of control parameter configurations in unseen environments, this paper crafts a general framework leveraging machine learning classification and quantitative characteristics of the problem landscape. The proposed framework is extensively explored by training 84 high-accuracy classifiers comprised of multiple sampling methods, fitness types, and binning strategies. Furthermore, a new parameter-reduced particle swarm optimization variant is constructed using the framework to eliminate the computational cost of parameter tuning and yields competitive performance amongst other leading methodologies across 60 unseen benchmark functions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it