Dynamic Multiobjective Optimization Algorithm Guided by Recurrent Neural Network
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
In recent years, prediction-based algorithms have attracted much attention for solving dynamic multiobjective optimization (DMO) problems in the evolutionary computing community. However, this class of algorithms still has potential for further improvements by enhancing the historical information extraction approach to balance convergence and diversity. In this article, we propose a DMO algorithm based on a recurrent neural network (RNN) to balance the population’s convergence and diversity in dynamic environments. The RNN model in the proposed algorithm employs online learning in order to constantly improve according to the increasing evolutionary information. Meanwhile, differing from most existing prediction-based algorithms, the learning machine is not limited by assumptions, such as linear or nonlinear correlation, when it predicts new solutions for future evolutionary environments. Besides, an auxiliary strategy is performed, which adaptively introduces the random or mutated solutions according to the error losses between the prediction solutions and the optimal solutions in the whole optimization process. The experimental results show that the proposed algorithm is more effective for handling DMO problems than several recent algorithms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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