MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W840160456 · doi:10.4018/ijssci.2014070101

Enhanced Global Best Particle Swarm Classification

2014· article· en· W840160456 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Computing and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationBenchmark (surveying)CentroidComputer sciencePosition (finance)Set (abstract data type)Multi-swarm optimizationSwarm behaviourAlgorithmSpace (punctuation)Data miningArtificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Particle Swarm Classification (PSC) is a derivative of Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) based on the retrieval of the best particle positions corresponding to the centroids of classes. This paper addresses how the position update mechanisms impacts the accuracy of a global best PSC approach. The authors present two variants of the PSC algorithm with different position update mechanisms. In particular, the authors show how the combination of a good parameters tuning, a particle confinement to the search space and a biologically inspired wind dispersion mechanism for them improves the covering quality of search space and thus the classification accuracy of the basic global PSC algorithm. An experimental set up was realized and tested on five benchmark databases, leading to better recognition accuracies than those obtained with the previous PSC 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.291 · 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