A Prediction and Weak Coevolution-Based Dynamic Constrained Multiobjective Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (DMOEAs) have gained great popularity in dealing with the dynamic multiobjective optimization problems (DMOPs). However, the existing studies have difficulties in tackling DMOPs subject to (dynamic) constraints. In this article, we propose a prediction and weak coevolutionary multiobjective optimization algorithm (PWDCMO) to handle the dynamic constrained multiobjective optimization problems (DCMOPs), where a prediction strategy is employed to forecast potential optimal regions under the new environment, with a weak coevolutionary constrained multiobjective optimization (CCMO) as the optimizer aiming at balancing exploration and convergence. The proposed method is compared with the four popular dynamic constrained multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (DCMOEAs) on six test instances from two various test suites with their convergence and the overall performance being discussed. Furthermore, the performance of the proposed prediction strategy is also investigated to observe its impact on the final results. Additionally, the PWDCMO is employed in the optimization of an integrated coal mine energy system (ICMES) to validate the proficiency in addressing real world problems. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of PWDCMO.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".