Population-level center-based sampling for meta-heuristic algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, center-based sampling has demonstrated p results for enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of meta-heuristic algorithms. The strategy of center-based sampling can be utilized at either the operation and/or population levels. Despite the overall efficiency of the center-based sampling in population-based algorithms, utilization at the operation requires customizing the strategy for a specific algorithm, degrading the generalization of the scheme. This study proposes a center-based sampling at the population level, which is operation-independent and correspondingly can be embedded in any population-based optimization algorithm. The proposed center-based sampling uses a collaborative multi-parent approach to generate multiple center-based solutions leading to augmented diversity as well as the exploitation of the solution space. Accordingly, two population-level center-based sampling, namely cluster-driven center-based sampling and ranking-driven center-based sampling are proposed to enhance population-based single- and multi-objective optimization algorithms, respectively. In order to assess the performance of proposed schemes, the proposed strategy is integrated in well-known single- and multi-objective optimization algorithms to solve the CEC-2017 benchmark functions. The experimental outcomes confirm that the algorithm with embedded population-level center-based samplings have a crucial positive impact on the convergence rate of various families of optimization algorithms compared to the parent algorithm.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".