Soft Computing

, Volume 21, Issue 21, pp 6237–6252 | Cite as

Regression line shifting mechanism for analyzing evolutionary optimization algorithms

  • Anupam Biswas
  • Bhaskar Biswas


This work introduces a novel methodology to perform the comparative analysis of evolutionary optimization algorithms. The methodology relies simply on linear regression and quantile–quantile plots. The methodology is extrapolated as the one-to-one comparison, one-to-many comparison and many-to-many comparison of solution quality and convergence rate. Most of the existing approaches utilize both solution quality and convergence rate to perform comparative analysis. However, many-to-many comparison, i.e., ranking of algorithms is done only in terms of solution quality. The proposed method is capable of ranking algorithms in terms of both solution quality and convergence rate. Method is analyzed with well-established algorithms and real data obtained from 25 benchmark functions.


Evolutionary optimization algorithms Linear regression Particle swarm optimization Differential evolution Visual analysis 



Part of the work has been appeared at ISCBI 2014 (Biswas and Biswas 2014). Proper citations have been included for the same in the above work for the purpose transparency.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Also informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Human and animal rights

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


  1. Biswas A, Biswas B (2014) Visual analysis of evolutionary optimization algorithms. In: 2014 2nd International symposium on computational and business intelligence (ISCBI), pp 81–84Google Scholar
  2. Biswas A, Gupta P, Modi M, Biswas B (2015) An empirical study of some particle swarm optimizer variants for community detection. In: El–Alfy E-SM, Thampi SM, Takagi H, Piramuthu S, Hanne T. (eds) Advances in intelligent informatics. Springer, Berlin, pp 511–520Google Scholar
  3. Carrano EG, Takahashi RH, Wanner EF (2008) An enhanced statistical approach for evolutionary algorithm comparison. In: Proceedings of the 10th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation (GECCO ’08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 897–904Google Scholar
  4. Czarn A, MacNish C, Vijayan K, Turlach B, Gupta R (2004) Statistical exploratory analysis of genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 8(4):405–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Derrac J, García S, Molina D, Herrera F (2011) A practical tutorial on the use of nonparametric statistical tests as a methodology for comparing evolutionary and swarm intelligence algorithms. Swarm Evol Comput 1(1):3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Francois O, Lavergne C (2001) Design of evolutionary algorithms-a statistical perspective. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 5(2):129–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. García S, Molina D, Lozano M, and Herrera F (2007) An experimental study on the use of non-parametric tests for analyzing the behaviour of evolutionary algorithms in optimization problems. In: Proceedings of the Spanish congress on metaheuristics, evolutionary and bioinspired algorithms (MAEB2007), pp 275–285Google Scholar
  8. 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 cec2005 special session on real parameter optimization. J Heuristics 15(6):617–644CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. He J, Chen T (2013) Novel analysis of population scalability in evolutionary algorithms. CoRR abs/1108.4531.
  10. He J, Yao X (2001) Drift analysis and average time complexity of evolutionary algorithms. Artif Intell 127(1):57–85MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Lockett A (2013) Measure-theoretic analysis of performance in evolutionary algorithms. In: 2013 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC), pp 2012–2019Google Scholar
  12. Lutton E, Fekete J-D (2011) Visual analytics and experimental analysis of evolutionary algorithms, Research Report RR-7605, INRIA.
  13. Mersmann O, Preuss M, Trautmann H (2010) Benchmarking evolutionary algorithms: towards exploratory landscape analysis. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  14. Muhlenbein H, Mahnig T (2001) Mathematical analysis of evolutionary algorithms for optimization. In: Proceedings of the third international symposium on adaptive systems. La Havana, pp 166–185Google Scholar
  15. Moreno-Pérez J, Campos-Rodríguez C, Laguna M (2007) On the comparison of metaheuristics through non-parametric statistical techniques. In: Proceedings of the Spanish congress on metaheuristics, evolutionary and bioinspired algorithms (MAEB2007), pp 286–293Google Scholar
  16. Nijssen S, Back T (2003) An analysis of the behavior of simplified evolutionary algorithms on trap functions. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 7(1):11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Qin A, Suganthan P (2005) Self-adaptive differential evolution algorithm for numerical optimization. In: The 2005 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, vol 2, pp 1785–1791Google Scholar
  18. Ratnaweera A, Halgamuge S, Watson H (2004) Self-organizing hierarchical particle swarm optimizer with time-varying acceleration coefficients. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 8(3):240–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rojas I, Gonzalez J, Pomares H, Merelo J, Castillo P, Romero G (2002) Statistical analysis of the main parameters involved in the design of a genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern C Appl Rev 32(1):31–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shi Y, Eberhart R (1999) Empirical study of particle swarm optimization, In: Proceedings of the 1999 congress on evolutionary computation, 1999 (CEC 99), vol 3, p 1950Google Scholar
  21. Shilane D, Martikainen J, Dudoit S, Ovaska SJ (2008) A general framework for statistical performance comparison of evolutionary computation algorithms. Inf Sci 178(14):2870–2879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Suganthan PN, Hansen N, Liang JJ, Deb K, Chen Y-P, Auger A, Tiwari S (2005) Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the cec 2005 special session on real-parameter optimization. KanGAL report 2005005Google Scholar
  23. Veček N, Mernik M, Črepinšek M (2014) A chess rating system for evolutionary algorithms: a new method for the comparison and ranking of evolutionary algorithms. Inf Sci 277:656–679MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wolpert D, Macready W (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 1(1):67–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wu A, De Jong K, Burke D, Grefenstette J, Loggia Ramsey C (1999) Visual analysis of evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 1999 congress on evolutionary computation, 1999 (CEC 99), vol 2, p 1425Google Scholar
  26. Yang X-S (2011) Metaheuristic optimization: algorithm analysis and open problems. In: Pardalos P, Rebennack S (eds) Experimental algorithms, vol 6630, lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 21–32Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology (BHU)VaranasiIndia

Personalised recommendations