MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411026218 · doi:10.3390/a18060341

S-EPSO: A Socio-Emotional Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm for Multimodal Search in Low-Dimensional Engineering Applications

2025· article· en· W4411026218 on OpenAlexafffund
Raynald Guilbault

Bibliographic record

VenueAlgorithms · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationMathematical optimizationAlgorithmComputer scienceMulti-swarm optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines strategies aimed at improving search procedures in multimodal, low-dimensional domains. Here, low-dimensional domains refers to a maximum of five dimensions. The present analysis assembles strategies to form an algorithm named S-EPSO, which, at its core, locates and maintains multiple optima without relying on external niching parameters, instead adapting this functionality internally. The first proposed strategy assigns socio-emotional personalities to the particles forming the swarm. The analysis also introduces a technique to help them visit secluded zones. It allocates the particles of the initial distribution to subdomains based on biased decisions. The biases reflect the subdomain’s potential to contain optima. This potential is established from a balanced combination of the jaggedness and the mean-average interval descriptors developed in the study. The study compares the performance of S-EPSO to that of state-of-the-art algorithms over seventeen functions of the CEC benchmark, and S-EPSO is revealed to be highly competitive. It outperformed the reference algorithms 14 times, whereas the best of the latter outperformed the other two 10 times out of 30 relevant evaluations. S-EPSO performed best with the most challenging 5D functions of the benchmark. These results clearly illustrate the potential of S-EPSO when it comes to dealing with practical engineering optimization problems limited to five dimensions.

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlgorithmsSame topicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207