A comparative study of metaheuristics algorithms based on their performance of complex benchmark problems

Tithli Sadhu, Somanth Chowdhury, Shubham Mondal, Jagannath Roy, J. Chakrabarty, S. Lahiri
{"title":"A comparative study of metaheuristics algorithms based on their performance of complex benchmark problems","authors":"Tithli Sadhu, Somanth Chowdhury, Shubham Mondal, Jagannath Roy, J. Chakrabarty, S. Lahiri","doi":"10.31181/dmame0306102022r","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Metaheuristic approaches with extremely important improvements are very promising in the solution of intractable optimization problems. The objective of the present study is to test the capability of applications and compare the performance of the four selected algorithms from “classical” (simulated annealing (SA), genetic algorithm (GA), particle swarm optimization (PSO), and differential evolution (DE)) and “new generation” (firefly algorithm (FFA), krill herd (KH), grey wolf optimization (GWO), and symbiotic organism search (SOS)) each by solving selected benchmark problems that are used in the literature for algorithm testing purpose. The selected test problems had very complex objective functions and associated constraints with multiple local optima. Among all selected algorithms, the “new generation” SOS and KH algorithm successfully solved most of all the selected benchmark problems and achieved the best solution for most of them. Among four “classical” algorithms, DE, and PSO effectively attained the optimal solution which was very close to the best one. However, the “new generation” algorithm performed much better than the “classical” one. Therefore, no firm conclusion can be done about the universally best algorithm and their performance may be varied for different benchmark problems. However, in this study for the seven selected test problems, SOS and KH exhibited the most promising result and great potential with respect to execution time also. This study gives some insights to use SOS and KH as the best-performing algorithms to the novice user who can easily get lost in the plethora of large optimization algorithms.","PeriodicalId":32695,"journal":{"name":"Decision Making Applications in Management and Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Decision Making Applications in Management and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame0306102022r","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Decision Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Metaheuristic approaches with extremely important improvements are very promising in the solution of intractable optimization problems. The objective of the present study is to test the capability of applications and compare the performance of the four selected algorithms from “classical” (simulated annealing (SA), genetic algorithm (GA), particle swarm optimization (PSO), and differential evolution (DE)) and “new generation” (firefly algorithm (FFA), krill herd (KH), grey wolf optimization (GWO), and symbiotic organism search (SOS)) each by solving selected benchmark problems that are used in the literature for algorithm testing purpose. The selected test problems had very complex objective functions and associated constraints with multiple local optima. Among all selected algorithms, the “new generation” SOS and KH algorithm successfully solved most of all the selected benchmark problems and achieved the best solution for most of them. Among four “classical” algorithms, DE, and PSO effectively attained the optimal solution which was very close to the best one. However, the “new generation” algorithm performed much better than the “classical” one. Therefore, no firm conclusion can be done about the universally best algorithm and their performance may be varied for different benchmark problems. However, in this study for the seven selected test problems, SOS and KH exhibited the most promising result and great potential with respect to execution time also. This study gives some insights to use SOS and KH as the best-performing algorithms to the novice user who can easily get lost in the plethora of large optimization algorithms.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于复杂基准问题性能的元启发式算法的比较研究
元启发式方法具有非常重要的改进,在解决棘手的优化问题方面非常有前途。本研究的目的是测试应用程序的能力,并比较“经典”算法(模拟退火(SA),遗传算法(GA),粒子群优化(PSO)和差分进化(DE))和“新一代”算法(萤火虫算法(FFA),磷虾群(KH),灰狼优化(GWO),和共生生物搜索(SOS))分别通过解决文献中用于算法测试目的的选定基准问题。所选择的测试问题具有非常复杂的目标函数和相关约束,并且具有多个局部最优解。在所有选择的算法中,“新一代”的SOS和KH算法成功地解决了大多数选择的基准问题,并获得了大多数基准问题的最优解。在四种“经典”算法中,DE和PSO有效地获得了非常接近最佳解的最优解。然而,“新一代”算法比“经典”算法表现得好得多。因此,对于普遍最优的算法并不能得出确切的结论,对于不同的基准问题,它们的性能可能会有所不同。然而,在本研究中,对于七个选定的测试问题,SOS和KH在执行时间方面也表现出最有希望的结果和巨大的潜力。这项研究为使用SOS和KH作为性能最好的算法的新手用户提供了一些见解,他们很容易迷失在大量的大型优化算法中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Decision Making Applications in Management and Engineering
Decision Making Applications in Management and Engineering Decision Sciences-General Decision Sciences
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
A hybrid method for occupations selection in the bio-circular-green economy project of the national housing authority in Thailand Random centroid initialization for improving centroid-based clustering Evaluating and Ranking Metaverse Platforms Using Intuitionistic Trapezoidal Fuzzy VIKOR MCDM: Incorporating Score and Accuracy Functions for Comprehensive Assessment The New Measures of Lorenz Curve Asymmetry: Formulation and Hypothesis Testing Business Process Redesign: A Systematic Review of Evaluation Approaches
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1