MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404469638 · doi:10.1109/tcyb.2024.3489885

A Hierarchical Surrogate-Assisted Differential Evolution With Core Space Localization

2024· article· en· W4404469638 on OpenAlexaff
Laiqi Yu, Zhenyu Meng, Haibin Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cybernetics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
FundersFujian University of Technology
KeywordsCore (optical fiber)Space (punctuation)Differential (mechanical device)Differential evolutionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEngineeringTelecommunicationsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surrogate-assisted evolutionary algorithms (SAEAs) are extensively used to tackle expensive optimization problems (EOPs). The integration of surrogate-based global and local search is a prevalent hierarchical SAEA framework, which can effectively balance exploration and exploitation capabilities. However, it still faces challenges when tackling high-dimensional EOPs (HEOPs) owing to the curse of dimensionality. In this article, we propose a hierarchical surrogate-assisted differential evolution with core space localization (HSADE-CS) to solve HEOPs. Its contributions are listed as follows: 1) a top-promising sampling strategy is introduced in the global search to mitigate the challenges posed by the uncertainty in the performance of the surrogate model; 2) a core space localization (CSL) method is proposed to identify a high-potential space within the local promising region, enhancing the effectiveness of local search; and 3) a fitness-independent adaptive parameter control method based on the Minkowski distance is developed within the differential evolution (DE) optimizer to improve the performance of surrogate model-driven local search. The performance of HSADE-CS has been validated on numerous benchmark problems from the commonly used expensive optimization benchmark suite, as well as the CEC2014 and CEC2017 benchmark suites, with problem dimensions up to 500. It has also been tested on a real-world problem, i.e., circular antenna array design optimization. Experimental results demonstrate that HSADE-CS is highly competitive compared to the state-of-the-art SAEAs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CyberneticsSame topicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207