An Evolutionary Algorithm for Expensive Mixed-Integer Black-Box Optimization with Explicit Constraints
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
Determining the feasibility of a candidate solution to a constrained black-box optimization problem may be similarly expensive compared to the process of determining its quality, or it may be much cheaper. Constraints that allow obtaining degrees of feasibility or constraint violation without incurring significant computational costs are referred to as explicit. We present an evolutionary algorithm for solving mixed-integer black-box optimization problems where objective function evaluations are expensive but constraints are explicit. We do not assume relaxability of the constraints. The method wraps active-set evolution strategies, an algorithm for solving continuous black-box problems with explicit constraints, in a branching mechanism that allows enforcing integrality constraints. In computer experiments we demonstrate that the algorithm solves a set of mixed-integer problems with significantly fewer objective function evaluations than several algorithms that do not exploit the explicitness of the constraints.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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