Choose between PSO, ACO, genetic algorithms, and gradient-based optimizers for a given LLM or agent optimization problem. Bio-inspired swarm algorithms are gradient-free and suit LLM-era workloads where the search space is discrete or the fitness function is black-box. Use when you need help with swarm optimizer.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add anubhavg-icpl/vibe --skill swarm-optimizer --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Swarm Optimizer?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/anubhavg-icpl-swarm-optimizer)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: swarm-optimizer
description: Choose between PSO, ACO, genetic algorithms, and gradient-based optimizers for a given LLM or agent optimization problem. Bio-inspired swarm algorithms are gradient-free and suit LLM-era workloads where the search space is discrete or the fitness function is black-box. Use when you need help with swarm optimizer.
license: CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0
phase: 16
lesson: 19
metadata:
version: 1.0.0
tags: [multi-agent, swarm-optimization, PSO, ACO, prompt-optimization, routing]
---
Given an LLM or agent optimization problem, choose the right optimizer.
Produce:
1. **Problem fingerprint.** Search space (continuous numeric, prompt string, model weights, routing graph), fitness signal (automatic test, LLM judge, human rater, business KPI), time-to-value (minutes, hours, days).
2. **Optimizer choice.** PSO, ACO, genetic algorithm, DPO/RL, manual tuning. Each has a default use case:
- continuous numeric on a bounded space → PSO
- routing or path selection → ACO
- discrete symbolic / programs → genetic algorithms
- differentiable reward → DPO/RL
- low-dimensional, fast eval → grid/random search
3. **Population sizing.** 10-30 for PSO/GA, pheromone matrix size for ACO. Budget calculation: N × T × cost-per-eval. Do not run swarms that cost more than the value they produce.
4. **Fitness + quality gate.** What function scores a candidate? For ACO routing, what quality threshold triggers pheromone deposit?
5. **Convergence monitoring.** Log g_best or pheromone stability per iteration. Alert on divergence (catastrophic drift) and on premature convergence (local optimum).
6. **Decay / exploration tuning.** PSO inertia and cognitive/social weights; ACO pheromone decay rate and deposit amount. Trade-off: low decay → stuck on early winner; high decay → no memory.
7. **Reset conditions.** When the eval distribution shifts or the deployment pattern changes, reset g_best or zero pheromones temporarily. Stale memories are worse than no memories.
Hard rejects:
- Swarm optimizers on tasks where fitness needs human review. Cost-per-iteration dwarfs budget.
- Population sizes > 50 without a clear budget justification. Diminishing returns dominate.
- Pheromone routing without a quality gate. Fast-but-wrong agents lock in.
- PSO on discrete search spaces that do not have a natural continuous embedding. Use GA or simulated annealing instead.
Refusal rules:
- If the user is trying to optimize something with no clear fitness function, recommend defining fitness first. Swarm optimizers cannot help without an evaluator.
- If the user's budget is under $100, recommend manual tuning + caching rather than swarms.
- If the distribution shifts daily, recommend online learning or bandits, not swarm optimizers.
Output: a one-page brief. Start with a one-sentence recommendation ("Use ACO with quality-gated pheromone deposits on a 3-agent × 4-task-type routing problem. Decay 0.05, threshold 0.6, 200 warmup tasks."), then the seven sections above. End with a budget estimate and a 1-week rollout plan.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!