Memetic Computing

, 1:191 | Cite as

Selecting survivors in genetic algorithm using tabu search strategies

Regular Research Paper


Genetic algorithm (GA) is well-known for its effectiveness in global search and optimization. To balance selection pressure and population diversity is an important issue of designing GA. This paper proposes a novel hybridization of GA and tabu search (TS) to address this issue. The proposed method embeds the key elements of TS—tabu restriction and aspiration criterion—into the survival selection operator of GA. More specifically, the tabu restriction is used to prevent inbreeding for diversity maintenance, and the aspiration criterion is activated to provide moderate selection pressure under the tabu restriction. The interaction of tabu restriction and aspiration criterion enables survivor selection to balance selection pressure and population diversity. The experimental results on numerical and combinatorial optimization problems show that this hybridization can significantly improve GAs in terms of solution quality as well as convergence speed. An empirical analysis further identifies the influences of the TS strategies on the performance of this hybrid GA.


Genetic algorithm Tabu search Hybridization Survival selection 


  1. 1.
    Abdinnour-Helm S (1998) A hybrid heuristic for the uncapacitated hub location problem. Eur J Oper Res 106: 489–499MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ackley DH (1987) A connectionist machine for genetic Hillclimbing. Kluwer, BostonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aranha C, Iba H (2009) The memetic tree-based genetic algorithm and its application to portfolio optimization. Memetic Comput 1(2): 139–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bersini H, Dorigo M, Langerman S, Seront G, Gambardella L (1996) Results of the first international contest on evolutionary optimisation. In: Proceedings of the Third IEEE conference on evolutionary computation, pp 611–615Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chin AJ, Kit HW, Lim A (1999) A new GA approach for the vehicle routing problem. In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE international conference on tools with artificial intelligence, pp 307–310Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Jong K (1975) An analysis of the behavior of a class of genetic adaptive systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of MichiganGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eiben AE, Smith JE (2003) Introduction to evolutionary computing. Natural Computing. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gandomkar M, Vakilian M, Ehsan M (2005) A genetic-based tabu search algorithm for optimal DG allocation in distribution networks. Elect Power Compon Syst 33(12): 1351–1361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Glover F, Kelly JP, Laguna M (1995) Genetic algorithms and tabu search: hybrid for optimization. Computers Ops Res 22(1): 1–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glover F, Languna M (1997) Tabu search. Kluwer, BostonMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Griewank AO (1981) Generalized descent for global optimization. J Optim Theory Appl 34(1): 11–39MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hageman JA, Wehrens R, van Sprang HA, Buydens LMC (2003) Hybrid genetic algorithm-tabu search approach for optimising multilayer optical coatings. Anal Chim Acta 490: 211–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Handa K, Kuga S (1995) Pollycell placement for analog lsi chip designs by genetic algorithms and tabu search. In: IEEE int. conf. evol. comput., pp 716–721Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hart WE, Krasnogor N, Smith JE (2004) Recent advances in memetic algorithms. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hasan SMK, Sarker R, Essam D, Cornforth D (2009) Memetic algorithms for solving job-shop scheduling problems. Memetic Comput 1(1): 69–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Holland J (1975) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. University of Michigan Press, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ishibuchi H, Yoshida T, Murata T (2003) Balance between genetic search and local search in memetic algorithms for multiobjective permutation flowshop scheduling. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 7(2): 204–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jiang T, Cui Q, Shi G, Ma S (2003) Protein folding simulations of the hydrophobic–hydrophilic model by combining tabu search with genetic algorithms. J Chem Phys 119(8): 4592–4596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liaw CF (2000) A hybrid genetic algorithm for the open shop scheduling problem. Eur J Oper Res 124: 28–42MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nara K (1997) Genetic algorithm for power systems planning. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on advances in power system control, operation and management, pp 11–14Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Neri F, Tirronen V (2009) Scale factor local search in differential evolution. Memetic Comput 1(2): 153–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ong YS, Lim MH, Zhu N, Wong KW (2006) Classification of adaptive memetic algorithms: a comparative study. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B Cybern 36(1): 141–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ozdamar L, Birbil SI (1998) Hybrid heuristics for the capacitated lot sizing and loading problem with setup times and overtime decisions. Eur J Oper Res 110: 525–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rastrigin LA (1974) Systems of extremal control. Nauka, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Schwefel HP (1981) Numerical optimization of computer models. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shin DJ, Kim JO, Kim KT, Choo JB, Singh C (2004) Optimal service restoration and reconfiguration of network using genetic-tabu algorithm. Elect Power Syst Res 71: 145–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ting CK, Li ST, Lee C (2001) Tga: a new integrated approach to evolutionary algorithms. In: Proc. of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 917–924Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ting CK, Li ST, Lee CN (2003) On the harmonious mating strategy through tabu search. Inform Sci 156: 189–214CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vilcot G, Billaut JC (2008) A tabu search and a genetic algorithm for solving a bicriteria general job shop scheduling problem. Eur J Oper Res 190: 398–411MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Whitley D (1989) The genitor algorithm and selection pressure: Why rank-based allocation of reproductive trials is best. In: Proc. of the 3rd international conference on genetic algorithms, pp 116–121, San Mateo, CAGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Xian B, Li T, Sun G, Cao T (2004) The combination of principal component analysis, genetic algorithm and tabu search in 3d molecular similarity. Mol Struct 674: 87–97Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yu X, Tang K, Chen T, Yao X (2009) Empirical analysis of evolutionary algorithms with immigrants schemes for dynamic optimization. Memetic Comput 1(1): 3–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chuan-Kang Ting
    • 1
  • Cheng-Feng Ko
    • 1
  • Chih-Hui Huang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Information EngineeringNational Chung Cheng UniversityChia-YiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations