Skip to main content
Log in

An enhanced moth flame optimization with mutualism scheme for function optimization

  • Optimization
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nature-inspired meta-heuristics have demonstrated superior efficiency in the solution of complicated nonlinear optimization problems than conventional techniques. In this article, an enhanced moth flame optimization (EMFO) is designed using the mutualism phase from the symbiotic organism search (SOS) algorithm. The suggested approach is examined on 36 classical benchmark functions taken from literature. The outputs of EMFO are compared with the latest meta-heuristic algorithms and variants of the MFO algorithm. The comparison results indicate that our proposed method is competitive from the compared methods. Also, the Friedman rank test is used to evaluate the new algorithm’s efficiency, and it is found that the rank of EMFO is superior. Finally, EMFO is being applied to solve seven real-world problems, and the outcomes of the proposed algorithm were found to be satisfactory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The manuscript does not contain any associate data.

References

  • Allam DY, Eteiba A (2016) Parameter’s extraction of the three-diode model for the multi-crystalline solar cell/module using moth flame optimization algorithm. Energy Convers Manag 123:535–548

    Google Scholar 

  • Apinantanakon W, Sunat K (2017) Omfo: a new opposition-based moth-flame optimization algorithm for solving unconstrained optimization problems. In: International conference on computing and information technology. Springer: Cham 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60663-7_3

  • Arora S, Singh S (2015) Butterfly algorithm with levy flights for global optimization. In: International conference on signal processing, computing and control. IEEE, Solan, 220–224. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISPCC.2015.7375029

  • Asghari K, Masdari M, Gharehchopogh FS, Saneifard R (2021) A chaotic and hybrid gray wolf-whale algorithm for solving continuous optimization problems. Progress Artif Intell. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13748-021-00244-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asghari K, Masdari M, Gharehchopogh FS, and Saneifard R Multi‐swarm and chaotic whale‐particle swarm optimization algorithm with a selection method based on roulette wheel. Expert Syst e12779. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.12779

  • Babar S, Mohammad I, Mohammad A, Zahoor R (2016) Novel application of moth flame optimization algorithm for solving economic load dispatch problems with emission and valve point loading effect. In: 4th international conference on energy, environment and sustainable development

  • Bhesdadiya R, Trivedi IN, Jangir P, Kumar A, Jangir N, Totlani R (2017) A novel hybrid approach particle swarm optimizer with moth-flame optimizer algorithm. In: Advances in computer and computational sciences. Springer, pp 569–577. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3770-2_53

  • Bourouba B, Ladaci S, Chaabi A (2018) Moth flame optimisation algorithm-based fractional order PID controller with MRAC tuning configuration. Int J Syst Control Commun 9:148–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty S, Saha AK, Sharma S, Mirjalili S, Chakraborty R (2021a) A novel enhanced whale optimization algorithm for global optimization. Comput Ind Eng 153:107086. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-021-03304-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty S, Sharma S, Saha AK, Chakraborty S (2021b) SHADE-WOA: a metaheuristic algorithm for global optimization. Appl Soft Comput. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng MY, Prayogo D (2014) Symbiotic organisms search: a new metaheuristic optimization algorithm. Comput Struct 139:98–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Chickermane H, Gea H (1996) Structural optimization using a new local approximation method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 39:829–846

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dabba A, Tari A, Meftali S, Mokhtari R (2021) Gene selection and classification of microarray data method based on mutual information and moth flame algorithm. Expert Syst Appl 166:114012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.114012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dash SP, Subhashini KR, Satapathy JK (2020) Optimal location and parametric settings of FACTS devices based on JAYA blended moth flame optimization for transmission loss minimization in power systems. Microsyst Technol 26(5):1543–1552

    Google Scholar 

  • Elaziz MA, Ewees AA, Ibrahim RA, Lu S (2020) Opposition-based moth-flame optimization improved by differential evolution for feature selection. Math Comput Simul 168:48–75

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Emary E, Zawbaa HM (2016) Impact of chaos functions on modern swarm optimizers. PLoS ONE 11:27410691

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandomi AH (2014) Interior search algorithm (ISA) a novel approach for global optimization. ISA Trans 53:1168–1183

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandomi AH, Yang XS, Alavi AH (2011) Mixed variable structural optimization using firefly algorithm. Comput Struct 89:2325–2336

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandomi AH, Yang X-S, Alavi AH (2013) Cuckoo search algorithm: a metaheuristic approach to solve structural optimization problems. Eng Comput 29:17–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Gharehchopogh FS, Gholizadeh H (2019) A comprehensive survey: whale optimization algorithm and its applications. Swarm Evol Comput 48:1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Gu H, Wang X (2016) Application of NSGA-II algorithm in the design of car body lateral crashworthiness. DEStech Trans Mater Sci Eng (icmeat). https://doi.org/10.12783/dtmse/icmeat2016/6083

  • Gupta D, Ahlawat AK, Sharma A, Rodrigues JJPC (2020) Feature selection and evaluation for software usability model using modified moth-flame optimization. Computing 102(6):1503–1520

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Holand JH (1992) Genetic algorithms. Sci Am 267:66–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamil M, Yang XS (2013) A literature survey of benchmark functions for global optimization problems. Int J Math Model Numer Optim 4:150–194

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kadry S, Rajinikanth V, Raja NSM, Hemanth DJ, Hannon NM, Raj ANJ (2021) Evaluation of brain tumor using brain MRI with modified-moth-flame algorithm and Kapur’s thresholding: a study. Evol Intel 14(2):1053–1063

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamalapathi K, Priyadarshi N, Padmanaban S, Holm-Nielsen J, Azam F, Umayal C, Ramachandara murthy V (2018) A hybrid moth-flame fuzzy logic controller based integrated cuk converter fed brushless dc motor for power factor correction. Electronics 7:288. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics7110288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kavousi-Fard A, Rostami MA, Niknam T (2015) Reliability-oriented reconfiguration of vehicle-to-grid networks. IEEE Trans Industr Inf 11:682–691

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of ICNN’95. In: International conference on neural networks, 4:1942–1948

  • Khalilpourazari S, Khalilpourazary S (2019) An efficient hybrid algorithm based on water cycle and moth-flame optimization algorithms for solving numerical and constrained engineering optimization problems. Soft Comput 23(5):1699–1722

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan MF, Aadil F, Maqsood M, Bukhari SH, Hussain M, Nam Y (2018) Moth flame clustering algorithm for internet of vehicle (MFCA-IoV). IEEE Access 7:11613–11629

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan BS, Raja MAZ, Qamar A, Chaudhary NI (2021) Design of moth flame optimization heuristics for integrated power plant system containing stochastic wind. Appl Soft Comput 104:107193

    Google Scholar 

  • Kigsirisin S, Miyauchi H (2021) Short-term operational scheduling of unit commitment using binary alternative moth-flame optimization. IEEE Access 9:12267–12281

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S, Tejani GG, Mirjalili S (2019) Modified symbiotic organisms search for structural optimization. Eng Comput 35:1269–1296

    Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Li S, Liu Y (2016a) A least squares support vector machine model optimized by moth flame optimization algorithm for annual power load forecasting. Appl Intell 45:1166–1178

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Z, Zhou Y, Zhang S, Song J (2016b) Levy-flight moth-flame algorithm for function optimization and engineering design problems. Math Probl Eng 2016:1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Niu Z, Song Z, Li B, Fan J, Liu PX (2018) A double evolutionary learning moth-flame optimization for real-parameter global optimization problems. IEEE Access 6:76700–76727

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Z, Zeng J, Chen Y, Ma G, Liu G (2021) Death mechanism-based moth–flame optimization with improved flame generation mechanism for global optimization tasks. Expert Syst Appl. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma L, Wang C, Xie NG, Shi M, Ye Y, Wang L (2021) Moth-flame optimization algorithm based on diversity and mutation strategy. Appl Intell. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-020-02081-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masdari M, Zangakani M (2020) Green cloud computing using proactive virtual machine placement: challenges and issues. Journal of Grid Computing 18(4):727–759

    Google Scholar 

  • Masdari M, Salehi F, Jalali M, Bidaki M (2017) A survey of PSO-based scheduling algorithms in cloud computing. J Netw Syst Manag 25(1):122–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Masdari M, Barshande S, Ozdemir S (2019) CDABC: chaotic discrete artificial bee colony algorithm for multi-level clustering in large-scale WSNs. J Supercomput 75(11):7174–7208

    Google Scholar 

  • Milton F (1937) The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. J Am Stat Assoc 32:675–701

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Mirjalili S (2015) Moth-flame optimization algorithm: a novel nature-inspired heuristic paradigm. Knowled Based Syst 89:228–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirjalili S (2016) SCA: a sine cosine algorithm for solving optimization problems. Knowl Based Syst 96:120–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Muangkote N, Sunat K, Chiewchanwattana S (2016) Multilevel thresholding for satellite image segmentation with moth-flame based optimization. In: Proceedings of 13th international Joint conferences on computer science and software engineering (JCSSE), Khon Kaen, Thailand, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/JCSSE.2016.7748919

  • Nama S, Saha AK, Ghosh S (2016) Improved symbiotic organisms search algorithm for solving unconstrained function optimization”. Decis Sci Lett 5:361–380. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.dsl.2016.2.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nama S, Saha AK, Ghosh S (2017a) A hybrid symbiosis organisms search algorithm and its application to real world problems. Memetic Comput 9(3):261–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Nama S, Saha AK, Ghosh S (2017b) A hybrid symbiosis organisms search algorithm and its application to real world problems. Memetic Comput 9:261–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Nama S, Saha AK, Sharma S (2020b) A novel improved symbiotic organisms search algorithm. Comput Intell. https://doi.org/10.1111/coin.12290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nama S, Saha AK, Sharma S (2020) A hybrid TLBO algorithm by quadratic approximation for function optimization and its application. Recent trends and advances in artificial intelligence and internet of things. Springer: Cham, pp 291–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32644-9_30

  • Nanda SJ (2016) Multi-objective moth flame optimization. In: International conference on advances in computing, communications and informatics (ICACCI). IEEE 2470-2476. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACCI.2016.7732428

  • Pelusi D, Mascella R, Tallini L, Nayak J, Naik B, Deng Y (2020) An Improved Moth-Flame Optimization algorithm with hybrid search phase. Knowl Based Syst 191:105277

    Google Scholar 

  • Połap D (2017) Polar bear optimization algorithm: Meta-heuristic with fast population movement and dynamic birth and death mechanism. Symmetry 9:203. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym9100203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao R (2016) Jaya: a simple and new optimization algorithm for solving constrained and unconstrained optimization problems. Int J Ind Eng Comput 7:19–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy S, Panwar LK, Panigrahi BK, Kumar R (2018) Solution to unit commitment in power system operation planning using binary coded modified moth flame optimization algorithm (BMMFOA), a flame selection based computational technique. J Comput Sci 25:298–317

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sadollah A, Bahreininejad A, Eskandar H, Hamdi M (2013) Mine blast algorithm: a new population-based algorithm for solving constrained engineering optimization problems. Appl Soft Comput 13(5):2592–2612

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandgren E (1990) Nonlinear integer and discrete programming in mechanical design optimization. J Mech Des 112:223–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapre S, Mini S (2021a) Emulous mechanism based multi-objective moth–flame optimization algorithm. J Parallel Distribut Comput 150:15–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapre S, Mini S (2021b) A differential moth flame optimization algorithm for mobile sink trajectory. Peer-to-Peer Network Appl 14(1):44–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarma A, Bhutani A, Goel L (2017) Hybridization of moth flame optimization and gravitational search algorithm and its application to detection of food quality. In: 2017 intelligent systems conference (IntelliSys). IEEE 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1109/IntelliSys.2017.8324318

  • Savsani V, Tawhid MA (2017) Non-dominated sorting moth flame optimization (NS-MFO) for multi-objective problems. Eng Appl Artif Intell 63:20–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayed GI, Hassanien AE (2018) A hybrid SA-MFO algorithm for function optimization and engineering design problems. Complex Intell Syst 4:195–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Shan W, Qiao Z, Heidari AA, Chen H, Turabieh H, Teng Y (2021) Double adaptive weights for stabilization of moth flame optimizer: balance analysis, engineering cases, and medical diagnosis. Knowl-Based Syst 214:106728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.106728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma S, Saha AK, Majumder A, Nama S (2021) MPBOA-A novel hybrid butterfly optimization algorithm with symbiosis organisms search for global optimization and image segmentation. Multimed Tools Appl 80(8):12035–12076

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma S, Saha AK (2021) Bosca—a hybrid butterfly optimization algorithm modified with sine cosine algorithm. Progress in advanced computing and intelligent engineering. Springer: Singapore. pp 360–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6584-7_35

  • Sharma S, Saha AK. m-MBOA (2020) A novel butterfly optimization algorithm enhanced with mutualism scheme. Soft Comput 24:4809–27

  • Singh P, Prakash S (2017) Optical network unit placement in fiber-wireless (FiWi) access network by moth-flame optimization algorithm. Opt Fiber Technol 36:403–411

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh U, Salgotra R (2018) An enhanced moth flame optimization. Neural Comput Appl 26:1–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Soliman GMA, Khorshid MMH, Abou-El-Enien THM (2016) Modified moth-flame optimization algorithms for terrorism prediction 5(7):2

  • Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution-a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Glob Optim 11:341–359

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Suja KR (2021) Mitigation of power quality issues in smart grid using levy flight-based moth flame optimization algorithm. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-020-02626-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svanberg K (1987) The method of moving asymptotes-a new method for structural optimization. Int J Numer Methods Eng 24:359–373

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tan LS, Zainuddin Z, Ong P (2020) Wavelet neural networks-based solutions for elliptic partial differential equations with improved butterfly optimization algorithm training. Appl Soft Comput 95:106518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tejani GG, Pholdee N, Bureerat S, Prayogo D, Gandomi AH (2019) Structural optimization using multi-objective modified adaptive symbiotic organisms search. Expert Syst Appl 125:425–441

    Google Scholar 

  • Tumar I, Hassouneh Y, Turabieh H, Thaher T (2020) Enhanced binary moth flame optimization as a feature selection algorithm to predict software fault prediction. IEEE Access 8:8041–8055

    Google Scholar 

  • Verma S, Saha S, Mukherjee V (2017) A novel symbiotic organisms search algorithm for congestion management in deregulated environment. J Exp Theor Artif Intell 29:59–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang GG, Deb S, Cui Z (2015) Monarch Butterfly Optim Neural Comput Appl 31:1995–2014

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang M et al (2017) Toward an optimal kernel extreme learning machine using a chaotic moth flame optimization strategy with applications in medical diagnoses. Neurocomputing 267:69–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Z, Luo Q, Zhou Y (2020) Hybrid metaheuristic algorithm using butterfly and flower pollination base on mutualism mechanism for global optimization problems. Eng Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01025-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu W, Li Z, Lin Z, Wu W, Fang D (2018) Moth-flame optimization algorithm based on chaotic crisscross operator. Comput Eng Appl 2018:22

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamany W, Fawzy M, Tharwat A, Hassanien AE (2015) Moth flame optimization for training multi-layer perceptrons. In: Proceedings of 11th international computer engineering conference (ICENCO), Cario, Egypt, 267–272. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICENCO.2015.7416360

  • Yang XS (2009) Firefly algorithms for multimodal optimization. In: International symposium on stochastic algorithms. Springer 169–178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04944-6_14

  • Yi Y, He R (2014) A novel artificial bee colony algorithm. In: 2014 sixth international conference on intelligent human–machine systems and cybernetics, 1:271–274.

  • Yidiz BS, Yidiz AR (2017) Moth flame optimization algorithm to determine optimal machining parameters in manufacturing processes. Mater Test 59:425–429

    Google Scholar 

  • Yildiz AR, Abderazek H, Mirjalili S (2020) A comparative study of recent non-traditional methods for mechanical design optimization. Arch Comput Methods Eng 27(4):1031–1048

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zawbaa HM, Emary E, Parv B, Sharawi M (2016) Feature selection approach based on moth flame optimization algorithm. Proc IEEE Congr Evol Comput (CEC). https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2016.7744378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Z, Qin H, Yao L, Liu Y, Jiang Z, Feng Z, Ouyang S (2020) Improved multi-objective moth-flame optimization algorithm based on r-domination for cascade reservoirs operation. J Hydrol 581:124431

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao X, Fang Y, Liu L, Li J, Xu M (2020) An improved moth-flame optimization algorithm with orthogonal opposition-based learning and modified position updating mechanism of moths for global optimization problems. Appl Intell 50(12):4434–4458

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest and the present article does not comprise any studies performed by any of the authors with human participants or animals.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Tables

Table 16 Mathematical formulation of unimodal functions

16,

Table 17 Mathematical formulation of multimodal functions

17 and

Table 18 Mathematical formulation of multimodal functions

18.

Appendix 2

  1. a.

    Optimal capacity of gas production problem

    $$ {\text{Min }}f\left( x \right) = 61.8 + 5.72 \times x_{1} \times 0.2623 \times \left[ {\left( {40 - x_{1} } \right) \times \ln \frac{{x_{2} }}{200}} \right]^{ - 0.85} + 0.087 \times \left( {40 - x_{1} } \right) \times \ln \frac{{x_{2} }}{200} + 700.23 \times x_{2}^{ - 0.75} $$
    $$ {\text{s.t}}.\;x_{1} \ge 17.5, x_{2} \ge 200, 17.5 \le x_{1} \le 40, 300 \le x_{2} \le 600; $$
  2. b.

    Gear train design problem

    $$ {\text{Minimize}}\;f\left( {\vec{x}} \right) = \left[ {\frac{1}{6.931} - \frac{{x_{3} x_{2} }}{{x_{1} x_{4} }}} \right]^{2} , $$
    $$ {\text{Subjected to }}12\; \le x_{1} , x_{2} , x_{3} , x_{4} \le 60, $$
    $$ {\text{Where}}\;\vec{x} = \left[ {x_{1} x_{2} x_{3} x_{4} } \right] = \left[ {n\alpha \; n\beta \; n\gamma \; n\delta } \right]. $$
  3. c.

    Cantilever beam design problem

    $$ {\text{Minimize}}\;f\left( {\vec{x}} \right) = 0.06224\left( {x_{1} + x_{2} + x_{3} + x_{4} + x_{5} } \right), $$
    $$ {\text{Subjected to}}: \, h(\vec{x}) = \frac{61}{{x_{1}^{3} }} + \frac{37}{{x_{2}^{3} }} + \frac{19}{{x_{3}^{3} }} + \frac{7}{{x_{4}^{3} }} + \frac{1}{{x_{5}^{3} }} \le 1, $$
    $$ {\text{Where}}\;0.01 \le x_{1} , x_{2} , x_{3} , x_{4} , x_{5} \le 100. $$
  4. d.

    I- beam vertical deflection problem

    $$ {\text{Minimize}}\;f\left( {\vec{x}} \right) = \frac{5000}{{\frac{{2t_{f} \left( {h - t_{f} } \right)^{2} }}{2} + \frac{{t_{w} *\left( {h - 2t_{f} } \right)}}{12} + \frac{{bt_{f}^{3} }}{6}}} $$

    Subjected to the cross-sectional area (< 300 cm2).

    $$ x_{1} = t_{w} *\left( {h - 2t_{f} } \right) + 2*b*t_{w} \le 300, $$

    The stress constraint (where allowable bending stress of the beam is 56 KN/CM2)

    $$ x_{2} = \frac{{15*b*10^{3} }}{{\left( {h - 2t_{f} } \right)*t_{w}^{3} + 2t_{w} *b^{3} }} + \frac{{18*h*10^{4} }}{{\left( {h - t_{f} } \right)^{3} *t_{w} + 2b\left( {4t_{f}^{2} + 3h\left( {h - 2t_{f} } \right)} \right)t_{w} *b^{3} }} \le 56 $$
    $$ {\text{Provided}}\;0.9 \le t_{f} , t_{w} \le 5,{ }10 \le b \le 50\;{\text{ and }}\;10 \le h \le 80 $$
  5. e.

    Welded beam design problem

    $$ {\text{Minimize}}\;f\left( {{\vec{\text{x}}}} \right) = f\left( {h, l, t, b} \right) = f\left( {{\text{x}}_{1} ,{\text{ x}}_{2} ,{\text{ x}}_{3} ,{\text{ x}}_{4} } \right) = {\text{A}}x_{2} x_{1}^{2} + Bx_{4} x_{3} \left( {C + x_{2} } \right). $$
    $$ {\text{Subjected to}}\;h_{1} \left( x \right) = \tau_{\max } - \tau \left( x \right) \ge 0 $$
    $$ h_{2} \left( x \right) = \sigma_{\max } - \sigma \left( x \right) \ge 0 $$
    $$ h_{3} \left( x \right) = \delta_{max} - \delta \left( x \right) \ge 0 $$
    $$ h_{4} \left( x \right) = x_{4} - x_{1} \ge 0 $$
    $$ h_{5} \left( x \right) = P_{c} \left( x \right) - P \ge 0 $$

    where A = 1.10471; B = 0.04811; C = 14.0

    \(\tau_{\max } = 13600\) psi; \(\sigma_{\max } =\) 30000psi; \(\delta_{\max }\) = 0.25in;

    $$ \tau \left( x \right) = \sqrt {\left( {\tau^{\prime}\left( x \right)} \right)^{2} + \left( {\frac{{l\tau^{\prime\prime}\left( x \right)}}{{\sqrt {0.25\left( {x_{2}^{2} + \left( {x_{1} + x_{3} } \right)^{2} } \right)} }} + \left( {\tau^{\prime\prime}\left( x \right)} \right)^{2} } \right)} $$
    $$ \sigma \left( x \right) = \frac{50400}{{x_{4} x_{3}^{2} }} $$
    $$ P_{c} \left( x \right) = 64746x_{3} \left( {1 - 0.0282346x_{3} } \right)x_{4}^{3} $$
    $$ \delta \left( x \right) = \frac{2.1952}{{x_{4} x_{3}^{3} }} $$
    $$ \tau^{\prime}\left( x \right) = \frac{6000}{{\sqrt 2 x_{2} x_{1} }} $$
    $$ \tau^{\prime\prime}\left( x \right) = \frac{{6000\left( {0.5x_{2} + 14} \right)\sqrt {0.25\left( {x_{2}^{2} + \left( {x_{1} + x_{3} } \right)^{2} } \right)} }}{{2\left\{ {0.707x_{1} x_{2} \left( {\frac{{x_{2}^{2} }}{12} + 0.25\left( {x_{1} + x_{3} } \right)^{2} } \right)} \right\}}} $$
    $$ {\text{Range of variables}}\;0.125 \le x_{1} \le 5 $$
    $$ 0.1 \le x_{2} ,x_{3} \le 10 $$
    $$ 0.1 \le x_{4} \le 5 $$

    Parameters A = 1.10471; B = 0.04811; C = 14.0

    \(\tau_{\max } = 13600\) psi; \(\sigma_{\max } =\) 30000psi; \(\delta_{\max }\) = 0.25in;

    E = 30 \(\times 10^{6}\) psi G = 12 \(\times 10^{6}\) psi.

    P = 6000 lb.

    L = 14in.

  6. f.

    Three-bar truss problem

    $$ \vec{\user2{k}} = \left\{ {k_{1} , k_{2} , } \right\} $$

    Objective function

    $$ {\text{Min}} \cdot f\left( k \right) = L\left\{ {k_{2} + 2\sqrt 2 k_{1} } \right\} $$

    Subject to

    $$ h_{1} \left( k \right) = \frac{{k_{2} }}{{2k_{2} k_{1} + \sqrt 2 k_{1}^{2} }} P - \sigma \le 0, $$
    $$ h_{2} \left( k \right) = \frac{{k_{2} + \sqrt 2 k_{1} }}{{2k_{2} k_{1} + \sqrt 2 k_{1}^{2} }} P - \sigma \le 0, $$
    $$ h_{3} \left( k \right) = \frac{1}{{k_{1} + \sqrt 2 k_{2} }}P - \sigma \le 0, $$

    where

    $$ 0 \le k_{1} ,k_{2} \le 1,\;{\text{and}} $$
    $$ P = 2, L = 100 \& \sigma = 2 $$
  7. g.

    Car-side crash design problem

    $$ \vec{\user2{a}} = \left\{ {a_{1} ,\user2{ }a_{2} ,a_{3} ,\user2{ }a_{4} ,\user2{ }a_{5} ,\user2{ }a_{6} ,\user2{ }a_{7} ,a_{8} ,a_{9} ,\user2{ }a_{10} ,a_{11} } \right\} $$

Objective function

$$ Min \; f\left( a \right) = 1.98 + 4.90 a_{1} + 6.67 a_{2} + 6.98 a_{3} + 4.01 a_{4} + 1.78 a_{5} + 2.73 a_{7} , $$

Subject to

$$ \begin{aligned} h_{1} \left( a \right) & = 1.16 - 0.3717 a_{2} a_{4} - 0.00931 a_{2} a_{10} - 0.484 a_{3} a_{9} \\ & + 0.01343 a_{6} a_{10 } \le 1, \\ \end{aligned} $$
$$ \begin{aligned} h_{2} \left( a \right) & = 0.261 - 0.0159 a_{1} a_{2} - 0.188 a_{1} a_{8} - 0.019 a_{2} a_{7} + 0.0144 a_{3} a_{5} + 0.0008757 a_{5} a_{10} \\ & + 0.080405 a_{6} a_{9} + 0.00139 a_{8} a_{11} + 0.00001575 a_{10} a_{11} \le 0.32, \\ \end{aligned} $$
$$ \begin{aligned} h_{3} \left( a \right) & = 0.214 + 0.00817 a_{5} - 0.131 a_{1} a_{8} - 0.0704 a_{1} a_{9} + 0.03099 a_{2} a_{6} - 0.018 a_{2} a_{7} + 0.0208 a_{3} a_{8} \\ & + 0.121 a_{3} a_{9} - 0.00364 a_{5} a_{6} + 0.0007715 a_{5} a_{10} - 0.0005354 a_{6} a_{10} + 0.00121 a_{8} a_{11} \le 0.32, \\ \end{aligned} $$
$$ h_{4} \left( a \right) = 0.074 - 0.061 a_{2} - 0.163 a_{3} a_{8} + 0.001232 a_{3} a_{10} - 0.166 a_{7 } a_{9} + 0.227 a_{2}^{2} \le 0.32, $$
$$ \begin{aligned} h_{5} \left( a \right) & = 28.98 + 3.818 a_{3} - 4.2 a_{1} a_{2} + 0.0207 a_{5} a_{10} + 6.63 a_{6} a_{9} \\ & - 7.7 a_{7} a_{8} + 0.32 a_{9} a_{10} \le 32, \\ \end{aligned} $$
$$ h_{6} \left( a \right) = 33.86 + 2.95 a_{3} + 0.1792 a_{10} - 5.05 a_{1} a_{2} - 11.0 a_{2} a_{8} - 0.0215 a_{5} a_{10} - 9.98 a_{7} a_{8} + 22.0 a_{8} a_{9} \le 32, $$
$$ \user2{ }h_{7} \left( a \right) = 46.36 - 9.9 a_{2} - 12.9 a_{1} a_{8} + 0.1107 a_{3} a_{10} \le 32, $$
$$ \begin{aligned} h_{8} \left( a \right) & = 4.72 - 0.5 a_{4} - 0.19 a_{2} a_{3} - 0.0122 a_{4} a_{10} + 0.009325 a_{6} a_{10} \\ & + 0.000191 a_{11}^{2} \le 4, \\ \end{aligned} $$
$$ \begin{gathered} h_{9} \left( a \right) = 10.58 - 0.674 a_{1} a_{2} - 1.95 a_{2} a_{8} + 0.02054 a_{3} a_{10} - \hfill \\ 0.0198 a_{4} a_{10} + 0.028 a\left( 6 \right) a\left( {10} \right) \le 9.9, \hfill \\ \end{gathered} $$
$$ h_{10} \left( a \right) = 16.45 - 0.489 a_{3} a_{7} - 0.843 a_{5} a_{6} + 0.0432 a_{9} a_{10} - 0.0556 a_{9} a_{11} - 0.000786 a_{11}^{2} \le 15.7, $$

where

$$ 0.5 \le a_{i} \le 1.5, i = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 $$
$$ a_{8} ,a_{9} \in \left( {0.192, 0.345} \right), $$
$$ - 30 \le a_{10} , a_{11} \le 30. $$

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sahoo, S.K., Saha, A.K., Sharma, S. et al. An enhanced moth flame optimization with mutualism scheme for function optimization. Soft Comput 26, 2855–2882 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-021-06560-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-021-06560-0

Keywords

Navigation