Advertisement

Optimization and Engineering

, Volume 12, Issue 1–2, pp 31–54 | Cite as

An adaptive constraint handling technique for differential evolution with dynamic use of variants in engineering optimization

  • Eduardo K. da SilvaEmail author
  • Helio J. C. Barbosa
  • Afonso C. C. Lemonge
Article

Abstract

Differential Evolution is a simple and efficient stochastic population-based heuristics for global optimization over continuous spaces. As with other nature inspired techniques, there is no provision for constraint handling in its original formulation, and a few possibilities have been proposed in the literature. In this paper an adaptive penalty technique (APM), which has been shown to be quite effective within genetic algorithms, is adopted for constraint handling within differential evolution. The technique, which requires no extra parameters, is based on feedback obtained from the current status of the population of candidate solutions, and automatically defines, for each constraint, its corresponding penalty coefficient. Equality as well as inequality constraints can be dealt with. In this paper we additionally introduce a mechanism for dynamically selecting the mutation operator, according to its performance, among several variants commonly used in the literature. In order to assess the applicability and performance of the proposed procedure, several test-problems from the structural and mechanical engineering optimization literature are considered.

Keywords

Differential evolution Constrained optimization Adaptive penalty 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barbosa HJC, Lemonge ACC (2003) A new adaptive penalty scheme for genetic algorithms. Inf Sci 156(3–4):215–251 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbosa HJC, Lemonge ACC (2005) A genetic algorithm encoding for a class of cardinality constraints. In: GECCO’05: proceedings of the 2005 conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, pp 1193–1200 Google Scholar
  3. Barbosa HJC, Lemonge ACC (2008) An adaptive penalty method for genetic algorithms in constrained optimization problems. Frontiers in evolutionary robotics. I-Tech education and publishing Google Scholar
  4. Bernadino HS (2008) Hybridization of genetic algorithms and artificial immune systems for constrained optimization problems in engineering (in Portuguese). Master’s thesis, dissertation presented to the Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Brasil Google Scholar
  5. Coit DW, Smith AE, Tate DM (1996) Adaptive penalty methods for genetic optimization of constrained combinatorial problems. INFORMS J Comput 6(2):173–182 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deb K (2000) An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithms. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 186:311–338 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hamida SB, Schoenauer M (2000) An adaptive algorithm for constrained optimization problems. Parallel problem solving from nature PPSN VI. LNCS, vol 1917. Springer, Berlin, pp 529–538 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huang VL, Qin AK, Suganthan PN (2006) Self-adaptive differential evolution algorithm for contrained real-parameter optimization. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation Google Scholar
  9. Kannan BK, Kramer SN (1994) An augmented lagrange multiplier based method for mixed integer discrete continuous optimization and its applications to mechanical design. J Mech Des 116(2):405–411 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Koziel S, Michaelewicz Z (1999) Evolutionary algorithms, homomorphous mappings, and constrained parameter optimization. Evol Comput 7(1):19–44 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lampinen J, Zelinka I (1999) Mixed integer-discrete-continuous optimization by differential evolution, part 1: the optimization method. In: Proceedings of the 5th international Mendel conference on soft computing, pp 71–76 Google Scholar
  12. Lemonge ACC, Barbosa HJC (2004) An adaptive penalty scheme for genetic algorithms in structural optimization Int J Numer Methods Eng 59(5):703–736 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mezura-Montes E, Velázquez-Reyes J, Coelho CAC (2006a) A comparative study of differential evolution variants for global optimization. In: Proceedings of the GECCO’06, pp 8–12 Google Scholar
  14. Mezura-Montes E, Velázquez-Reyes J, Coelho CAC (2006b) Modified differential evolution for constrained optimization. In: Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 25–32 Google Scholar
  15. Onwubolu GC (2004) Differential evolution for the flow shop scheduling problem, pp 585–611 Google Scholar
  16. Patnaik S, Hopkins D, Coroneos R (1996) Structural optimization with aproximate sensitivities. Comput Struct 58(2):407–418 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Price KV (1999) An introduction to differential evolution. In: New ideas in optimization, pp 79–108 Google Scholar
  18. Qing A (2008) A study on base vector for differential evolution. In: Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC 2008) Google Scholar
  19. Silva EK, Barbosa HJC, Lemonge ACC (2008) An adaptive constraint handling technique for differential evolution in engineering optimization. In: International conference on engineering optimization, EngOpt 2008, p 46 Google Scholar
  20. Storn R, Price KV (1997) Differential evolution—a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Glob Optim 11:341–359 MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zielinski K, Laur R (2006) Constrained single-objective optimization using differential evolution. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eduardo K. da Silva
    • 1
    Email author
  • Helio J. C. Barbosa
    • 1
  • Afonso C. C. Lemonge
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratório Nacional de Computação Científica—LNCCPetrópolisBrasil
  2. 2.Departamento de Mecânica Aplicada e Computacional, Faculdade de EngenhariaUniversidade Federal de Juiz de ForaJuiz de ForaBrasil

Personalised recommendations