Artificial Intelligence Review

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 181–215 | Cite as

Improvement of harmony search algorithm by using statistical analysis

  • Hadi SarvariEmail author
  • Kamran Zamanifar


In this article, we suggest a new method to improve the harmony search meta-heuristic algorithm. Several approaches are presented for improving the harmony search algorithm. These approaches consider different values for initial parameters in each optimization problem. Differences between the proposed algorithm and the harmony search algorithm are as follows. First, we add a new step to create a new harmony vector, which increases the accuracy and convergence rate and reduces the impact of the initial parameters in achieving an optimal solution. Second, we set introduce a parameter called bandwidth (bw), which is an important factor with great influence on the convergence rate toward optimal solutions. To prove the efficiency and robustness of the proposed algorithm, we argument about statistical analysis of proposed algorithm and examine it through a variety of optimization problems, including constrained and unconstrained functions, mathematical problems with high dimensions and engineering and reliability problems. In all of these problems, the convergence rate and accuracy of the answer are equal to or better than other methods. In addition, in our proposed method, the effect of initial parameters has been reduced with respect to the optimal solution.


Harmony search Engineering problems Reliability problems Problems with high-dimensions Meta-heuristics Statistical analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Chen TC (2006) IAs based approach for reliability redundancy alposition problems. Appl Math Comput 182(2): 1556–1567zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Coelho LS (2009) An efficient particle swarm approach for mixed-integer programming in reliability–redundancy optimization applications. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 94(4): 830–837MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Coello CAC (2000) Use of a self-adaptive penalty approach for engineering optimization problems. Comput Ind 41(2): 113–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Colville AR (1968) A comparative study of nonlinear programming. IBM New York Scientific Center, Tech. Report No. 320-2949Google Scholar
  5. Deb K (2000) An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithms. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 186: 311–338zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dhingra AK (1992) Optimal apportionment of reliability and redundancy in series systems under multiple objectives. IEEE Trans Reliab 41(4): 576–582zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dixon LCW, Szego GP (1975) Towards global optimization. North Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  8. Eason ED, Fenton R (1974) GA comparison of numerical optimization methods for engineering design. ASME J Engrg Ind 96(1): 196–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fesanghary M, Mahdavi M, Minary-Jolandan M, Alizadeh Y (2008) Hybridizing harmony search algorithm with sequential quadratic programming for engineering optimization problems: harmony search theory and practice. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 197: 3080–3091zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fogel DB (1995) A comparison of evolutionary programming and genetic algorithms on selected constrained optimization problems. Simulation 64(6): 399–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Geem ZW (2008) Novel derivative of harmony search algorithm for discrete design variables. Appl Math Comput 199: 223–230MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Geem ZW, Kim JH, Loganathan GV (2001) A new heuristic optimization algorithm: harmony search. Simulation 76(2): 60–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gen M, Yun YS (2006) Soft computing approach for reliability optimization: state-of-the-art survey. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91(9): 1008–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Golinski J (1970) Optimal synthesis problem solved means of nonlinear programming and random methods. J Mech 5: 287–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Golinski J (1973) An adaptive optimization system applied to machine synthesis. Mech Mach Theory 8: 419–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hikita M, Nakagawa H, Harihisa H (1992) Reliability optimization of systems by a surrogate constraints algorithm. IEEE Trans Reliab 41(3): 473–780zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Homaifar A, Lai SHV, Qi X (1994) Constrained optimization via genetic algorithms. Simulation 62(4): 242–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hsieh YC, Chen TC, Bricker DL (1998) Genetic algorithm for reliability design problems. Microelectron Reliab 38: 1599–1605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jaberipour M, Khorram E (2010) Two improved armony searchalgorithms for solving engineering optimization problems. Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat (in press)Google Scholar
  20. Lee KS, Geem ZW (2004) A new meta-heuristic algorithm for continues engineering optimization: harmony search theory and practice. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 194: 3902–3933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Li HL, Papalambros P (1985) A production system for use of global optimization knowledge. ASME J Mech Transm Autom Des 107: 277–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mahdavi M, Fesanghary M, Damangir E (2007) An improved harmony search algorithm for solving optimization problems. Appl Math Comput 188: 1567–1579MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Omran MGH, Mahdavi M (2008) Global-best harmony search. Appl Math Comput 198: 643–656MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Prasad VR, Kuo W (2000) Reliability optimization of coherent systems. IEEE Trans Reliab 49(3): 323–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ragsdell KM, Phillips DT (1976) Optimal design of a class of welded structures using geometric programming. ASME J Engrg Ind Ser B 98(3): 1021–1025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Reklaitis GV, Ravindran A, Ragsdell KM (1983) Engineering optimization methods and applications. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenbrock HH (1960) An automatic method for finding the greatest or least value of a function. Comput J 3(3): 175–184MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sandgren E (1990) Nonlinear integer and discrete programming in mechanical design optimization. J Mech Des ASME 112: 223–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shi Y, Eberhart RC (1998) A modified particle swarm optimizer. In: Proceedings of the international congress on evolutionary computation. PiscatawayGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang CM, Huang YF (2010) Self-adaptive harmony search algorithm for optimization. Expert Syst Appl 37: 2826–2837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wu SJ, Chow PT (1995) Genetic algorithms for nonlinear mixed discrete-integer optimization problems via meta-genetic parameter optimization. Engrg Optim 24: 137–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yokota T, Gen M, Li HH (1996) Genetic algorithm for nonlinear mixed-integer programming problems and its application. Comput Ind Eng 30(4): 905–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zou D, Gao L, Wu J, Li S, Li Y (2010) A novel global harmony search algorithm for reliability problems. Comput Ind Eng 58: 307–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of computer, Faculty engineeringUniversity of IsfahanIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations