You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hey all,
working on my implementation of the PSO for an Auto-Tuning-Framework, I was wondering what the implementation of the PSO in OpenTuner is based on?
If I understand your implementation correctly, you're using weights c, c1 and c2 which are all equal to 0.5 scaled by a random float between 0.0 and 1.0. However what I found in theoretical references (e.g. Eberhart and Shi "Tracking and optimizing dynamic systems with particle swarms.") as a good choice for the weights was U(0,1) or even the use of a constricting coefficient instead of weights.
Is there a specific reason you decided to implement the PSO the way it currently is?
Cheers
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hey all,
working on my implementation of the PSO for an Auto-Tuning-Framework, I was wondering what the implementation of the PSO in OpenTuner is based on?
If I understand your implementation correctly, you're using weights
c
,c1
andc2
which are all equal to0.5
scaled by a random float between0.0
and1.0
. However what I found in theoretical references (e.g. Eberhart and Shi "Tracking and optimizing dynamic systems with particle swarms.") as a good choice for the weights wasU(0,1)
or even the use of a constricting coefficient instead of weights.Is there a specific reason you decided to implement the PSO the way it currently is?
Cheers
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: