MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411959463 · doi:10.31449/inf.v49i23.8270

Adaptive Strategy-Enhanced NSGA-II for Multi-Objective Optimization with Improved Convergence and Diversity Control

2025· article· en· W4411959463 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueInformatica · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvergence (economics)Diversity (politics)Mathematical optimizationControl (management)Computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEconomicsPolitical scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In modern society, sustainability has become an increasingly important issue. By solving multi-objective problems, decision-makers can make more sustainable decisions. To efficiently solve multi-objective problems, an adaptive strategy is proposed to optimize the crossover and mutation operators of the nondominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II). Moreover, the multi-objective flexible job shop scheduling problem is modeled by incorporating worker fatigue factors. Finally, the algorithm performance was tested using ZDT and DTLZ series test functions, and the multi-objective solving performance of the algorithm was tested based on standard examples FMk01-FMk06.The results showed that in the ZDT1 and ZDT2 test functions, the solution set coverage of the proposed algorithm was 0.833 and 0.906, respectively, and the inverse generation distance was 0.006 and 0.0059, respectively, achieving better convergence and diversity. In the DTLZ1 test function, the inverse generation distance of the proposed algorithm did not exceed 2. In the FMk03 example, the inverse generation distance of the proposed algorithm was 0.009, which was lower than the traditional NSGA-II algorithm. In the FMk06 example, the proposed algorithm achieved a super volume of 0.37, which was higher than the multiobjective squirrel search algorithm and NSGA-III algorithm. The experiment has demonstrated the effectiveness of the improved algorithm in solving multi-objective issues. The research results contribute to improving the efficiency of addressing multi-objective optimization and complex problems in real life, enhancing the scientificity and effectiveness of decision-making.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformaticaSame topicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207