Frilled Lizard Optimization: A Novel Nature-Inspired Metaheuristic Algorithm for Solving Optimization Problems
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
This article introduces a novel nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithm called Frilled Lizard Optimization (FLO), which emulates the hunting behavior of frilled lizards in their natural habitat. FLO draws in-spiration from the sit-and-wait strategy observed in frilled lizards during hunting. The underlying theory of FLO is presented and mathematically formulated in two phases: (i) an exploration phase, simulating the frilled lizard's attack towards prey, and (ii) an exploitation phase, simulating the lizard's retreat to the top of the tree after feeding. To assess FLO's efficacy in solving optimization problems, the algorithm's performance is evaluated across fifty-two standard benchmark functions, encompassing unimodal, high-dimensional multimodal, fixed-dimensional multimodal, and the CEC 2017 test suite. Comparative analyses with twelve existing metaheuristic algorithms are conducted. The simulation results reveal that FLO, distinguished by its adeptness in exploration, exploitation, and balancing them during search process, outperforms competing algorithms. Additionally, FLO is implemented on twenty-two constrained optimization problems from the CEC 2011 test suite and four engineering design problems, demonstrating its effectiveness in addressing real-world optimization applications.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 it