Advertisement

A novel hybrid metaheuristic optimization method: hypercube natural aggregation algorithm

  • Oscar Maciel
  • Arturo Valdivia
  • Diego OlivaEmail author
  • Erik Cuevas
  • Daniel Zaldívar
  • Marco Pérez-Cisneros
Methodologies and Application
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

The natural aggregation algorithm (NAA) is a new efficient population-based optimizer. The NAA has a competent performance when compared to other well-established optimizers. However, a problem of concern is NAA lack of exploitation in its local search. In this article, we propose an improved version of NAA. The modifications made are: hypercubes with displacement and shrink mechanism applied in each shelter, we designed a new movement operator to search inside the hypercubes, an improved readjustment of the algorithm’s parameters and “leave shelter” formula of NAA, to better mimic the aggregation behavior. To prove the effectiveness of the modified hypercube natural aggregation algorithm (HYNAA), we compared with classics optimizers, such as PSO, DE and ABC, state of the art, such as CMA-ES, MSA and NAA himself with a benchmark of 28 functions. The said functions consist of five unimodal, 19 multimodal and four hybrids, and we compared them on 30, 50 and 100 dimensions. We also made extra comparisons against NAA in 500 and 1000 dimensions to contrast the ability of the hypercubes to reduce the dimensional complexity. Finally, we tested two trajectory optimization problems. Experimental results and statistical tests demonstrate that the performance of HYNAA is significantly better than that of other optimizers.

Graphic abstract

Keywords

Hybrid optimization techniques Natural aggregation algorithm (NAA) Hypercube optimization (HO) Metaheuristic optimization 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

It is to specifically state that “No Competing interests are at stake and there is No Conflict of Interest” with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence or bias the content of the paper.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Abedinpourshotorban H, Mariyam Shamsuddin S, Beheshti Z, Jawawi DNA (2016) Electromagnetic field optimization: a physics-inspired metaheuristic optimization algorithm. Swarm Evol Comput 26:8–22.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2015.07.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abiyev RH, Tunay M (2015) Optimization of high-dimensional functions through hypercube evaluation. Comput Intell Neurosci.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/967320 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armstrong RA (2014) When to use the Bonferroni correction. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 34:502–508.  https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12131 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Askarzadeh A (2016) A novel metaheuristic method for solving constrained engineering optimization problems: Crow search algorithm. Comput Struct 169:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPSTRUC.2016.03.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aslan S, Badem H, Karaboga D (2019) Improved quick artificial bee colony (iqABC) algorithm for global optimization. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03858-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beyer H-G (2000) Evolutionary algorithms in noisy environments: theoretical issues and guidelines for practice. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 186:239–267.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(99)00386-2 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Beyer H-G, Sendhoff B (2008) Covariance matrix adaptation revisited—the CMSA evolution strategy. In: Rudolph G, Jansen T, Beume N et al (eds) Parallel problem solving from nature—PPSN X. Springer, Berlin, pp 123–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen L, Lu H, Li H et al (2019) Dimension-by-dimension enhanced cuckoo search algorithm for global optimization. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03844-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chu W, Gao X, Sorooshian S (2011) A new evolutionary search strategy for global optimization of high-dimensional problems. Inf Sci (Ny) 181:4909–4927.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INS.2011.06.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. David G (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning, 1st edn. Addison-Wesley, BostonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. García S, Molina D, Lozano M, Herrera F (2009) A study on the use of non-parametric tests for analyzing the evolutionary algorithms’ behaviour: a case study on the CEC’2005 Special Session on Real Parameter Optimization. J Heuristics 15:617–644.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10732-008-9080-4 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Hansen N, Ostermeier A (2001) Completely derandomized self-adaptation in evolution strategies. Evol Comput 9:159–195.  https://doi.org/10.1162/106365601750190398 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hochberg Y (1988) A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika.  https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/75.4.800 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Hosseini HS (2011) Principal components analysis by the galaxy-based search algorithm: a novel metaheuristic for continuous optimisation. Int J Comput Sci Eng 6:132.  https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCSE.2011.041221 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Izzo D (2007) 1st ACT global trajectory optimisation competition: problem description and summary of the results. Acta Astronaut 61:731–734.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ACTAASTRO.2007.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Karaboga D (2005) An idea based on Honey Bee Swarm for numerical optimization. Technical Report. TR06, Erciyes Univ 10Google Scholar
  17. Karaboga D, Basturk B (2007) Artificial bee colony (ABC) optimization algorithm for solving constrained optimization problems. In: Melin P, Castillo O, Aguilar LT, Kacprzyk J, Pedrycz W (eds) Foundations of fuzzy logic and soft computing. IFSA 2007. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4529. Springer, Berlin, HeidelbergzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of ICNN’95—international conference on neural networks. IEEE, pp 1942–1948Google Scholar
  19. 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 23:1699–1722.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-017-2894-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Li C, Luo F, Chen Y, et al (2017) Smart home energy management with vehicle-to-home technology. In: 2017 13th IEEE international conference on control & automation (ICCA). IEEE, Ohrid, pp 136–142Google Scholar
  21. Lihoreau M, Buhl J, Charleston MA et al (2014) Modelling nutrition across organizational levels: from individuals to superorganisms. J Insect Physiol 69:2–11.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JINSPHYS.2014.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Luo F, Zhao J, Dong ZY (2016) A new metaheuristic algorithm for real-parameter optimization: natural aggregation algorithm. In: 2016 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation CEC 2016, pp 94–103.  https://doi.org/10.1109/cec.2016.7743783
  23. Luo F, Ranzi G, Liang G, Dong ZY (2017) Stochastic residential energy resource scheduling by multi-objective natural aggregation algorithm. In: 2017 IEEE power & energy society general meeting. IEEE, Chicago, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  24. Luo F, Ranzi G, Kong W et al (2018) Coordinated residential energy resource scheduling with vehicle-to-home and high photovoltaic penetrations. IET Renew Power Gener 12:625–632.  https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-rpg.2017.0485 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A (2014) Grey wolf optimizer. Adv Eng Softw 69:46–61.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mohamed A-AA, Mohamed YS, El-Gaafary AAM, Hemeida AM (2017) Optimal power flow using moth swarm algorithm. Electr Power Syst Res 142:190–206.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EPSR.2016.09.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Peng ZK, Zhang SX, Zheng SY, Long YL (2019) Collective information-based teaching–learning-based optimization for global optimization. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-03741-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Price KV, Storn RM, Lampinen JA (2005) Differential evolution. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Rashedi E, Nezamabadi-pour H, Saryazdi S (2009) GSA: a gravitational search algorithm. Inf Sci (Ny) 179:2232–2248.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2009.03.004 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Stracquadanio G, La Ferla A, De Felice M, Nicosia G (2011) Research and development in intelligent systems XXVIII.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2318-7
  31. Sun G, Lan Y, Zhao R (2019a) Differential evolution with Gaussian mutation and dynamic parameter adjustment. Soft Comput 23:1615–1642.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-017-2885-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sun G, Yang B, Yang Z, Xu G (2019b) An adaptive differential evolution with combined strategy for global numerical optimization. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03934-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vinkó T, Izzo D (2008) Global optimisation heuristics and test problems for preliminary spacecraft trajectory design. Eur Space Agency. Adv Concepts Team, ACT Tech Rep, Tech Rep GOHTPPSTDGoogle Scholar
  34. Wilcoxon F (1945) Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biom Bull 1:80–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhao L, Wei J (2019) A nested particle swarm algorithm based on sphere mutation to solve bi-level optimization. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03888-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhao Y, Li W, Liu A (2019) Improved grey wolf optimization based on the two-stage search of hybrid CMA-ES. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03948-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.División de Electrónica y ComputaciónUniversidad de Guadalajara, CUCEIGuadalajaraMexico

Personalised recommendations