Simulated Annealing Optimized Rough Sets for Modeling Interstate Conflict

Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, methods to optimally granulize rough set partition sizes using simulated annealing technique, are proposed. The proposed procedure is applied to model the militarized interstate dispute data. The suggested technique is then compared to the rough set partition method that is based on particle swarm optimization. The results obtained demonstrate that simulated annealing provides higher forecasting accuracies than particle swarm optimization method.

References

  1. Abbasi B, Niaki STA, Khalife MA, Faize Y (2011) A hybrid variable neighborhood search and simulated annealing algorithm to estimate the three parameters of the Weibull distribution. Expert Syst Appl 38:700–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akhmatskaya E, Bou-Rabee N, Reich S (2009) A comparison of generalized hybrid Monte Carlo methods with and without momentum flip. J Comput Phys 228:2256–2265MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alfi A, Modares H (2011) System identification and control using adaptive particle swarm optimization. Appl Math Model 35:1210–1221MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Almaraashi M, John R (2010) Tuning fuzzy systems by simulated annealing to predict time series with added noise. UK. Workshop on Computer Intelligence, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  5. Anghinolfi D, Montemanni R, Paolucci M, Maria Gambardella L (2011) A hybrid particle swarm optimization approach for the sequential ordering problem. Comput Oper Res 38:1076–1085MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bazavov A, Berg BA, Zhou H (2009) Application of biased metropolis algorithms: from protons to proteins. Math Comput Simul. doi:10.1016/j.matcom.2009.05.005Google Scholar
  7. Bedard M (2008) Optimal acceptance rates for metropolis algorithms: moving beyond 0.234. Stoch Proc Appl 118:2198–2222MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bisetty K, Corcho FJ, Canto J, Kruger HG, Perez JJ (2006) Simulated annealing study of the pentacyclo-undecane cage amino acid tripeptides of the type [Ac-X-Y-Z-NHMe]. J Mol Struct THEOCHEM 759:145–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Briant O, Naddef D, Mounie G (2009) Greedy approach and multi-criteria simulated annealing for the car sequencing problem. Eur J Oper Res 191:993–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bryan K, Cunningham P, Bolshkova N (2006) Application of simulated annealing to the biclustering of gene expression data. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 10:10519–10525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chang Y (2006) An innovative approach for demand side management - optimal chiller loading by simulated annealing. Energy 31:1883–1896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chang Y, Chen W, Lee C, Huang C (2006) Simulated annealing based optimal chiller loading for saving energy. Energy Convers Manage 47:2044–2058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chunyu R, Xiaobo W (2010) Study on hybrid genetic simulated annealing algorithm for multi-cargo loading problem. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer, Mechatronics, Control and Electronic Engineering, pp 346–349, Changchun, China (2010)Google Scholar
  14. Cosola E, Genovese K, Lamberti L, Pappalettere C (2008) A general framework for identification of hyper-elastic membranes with moire tand multi-point simulated annealing. Intl J Solids Struct 45:6074–6099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cretu N, Pop M (2009) Acoustic behavior design with simulated annealing. Comput Mater Sci 44:1312–1318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Crossingham B, Marwala T, Lagazio M (2008) Optimised rough sets for modelling interstate conflict. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernatics, pp 1198–1204, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  17. Curran JM (2008) A MCMC method for resolving two person mixtures. Sci Justice 48:168–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dafflon B, Irving J, Holliger K (2009) Simulated-annealing-based conditional simulation for the local-scale characterization of heterogeneous aquifers. J Appl Geophys 68:60–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Das, A., Chakrabarti, B.K.: Quantum annealing and related optimization methods. Lecture Notes in Physics, vol. 679, Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  20. De Vicente J, Lanchares J, Hermida R (2003) Placement by thermodynamic simulated annealing. Phys Lett A 317:415–423MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dunn WL, Shultis JK (2009) Monte Carlo methods for design and analysis of radiation detectors. Radiat Phys Chem 78:852–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gallagher K, Charvin K, Nielsen S, Sambridge M, Stephenson J (2009) Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling methods to determine optimal models, model resolution and model choice for earth science problems. Mar Pet Geol 26:525–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gaucherel C, Campillo F, Misson L, Guiot J, Boreux JJ (2008) Parameterization of a process-based tree-growth model: comparison of optimization. MCMC and particle filtering algorithms. Environ Modell Softw 23:1280–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gomes AM, Oliveira JF (2006) Solving irregular strip packing problems by hybridising simulated annealing and linear programming. Eur J Oper Res 171:811–829MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. He R, Hwang S (2006) Damage detection by an adaptive real-parameter simulated annealing genetic algorithm. Comput Struct 84:2231–2243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jacquier E, Johannes M, Polson N (2007) MCMC maximum likelihood for latent state models. J Econ 137:615–640MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. Jia Y, Zhang C (2009) Front-view vehicle detection by Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Pattern Recognit 42:313–321MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jing L, Vadakkepat P (2009) Interacting MCMC particle filter for tracking maneuvering target. Digit Signal Process. doi:10.1016/j.dsp. 2009.08.011Google Scholar
  29. Jun SC, George JS, Kim W, Pare-Blagoev J, Plis S, Ranken DM, Schmidt DM (2008) Bayesian brain source imaging based on combined MEG/EEG and fMRI using MCMC. Neuroimage 40:1581–1594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kannan S, Zacharias M (2009) Simulated annealing coupled replica exchange molecular dynamics - an efficient conformational sampling method. J Struct Biol 166:288–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kennedy J, Eberhart RC (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, pp 1942–1948, PiscatawayGoogle Scholar
  32. Kennedy J, Eberhart RC (2001) Swarm Intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  33. Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt CD, Vecchi MP (1983) Optimization by simulated annealing. Sci, New Series 220:671–680MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. Lai Y (2009) Adaptive Monte Carlo methods for matrix equations with applications. J Comput Appl Math 231:705–714MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lamberti L (2008) An efficient simulated annealing algorithm for design optimization of truss structures. Comput and Struct 86:1936–1953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Liesenfeld R, Richard J (2008) Improving MCMC, using efficient importance sampling. Comput Stat Data Anal 53:272–288MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Liu X, Jiang W, Jakana J, Chiu W (2007) Averaging tens to hundreds of icosahedral particle images to resolve protein secondary structure elements using a multi-path simulated annealing optimization algorithm. J Struct Biol 160:11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Liu X, Newsome D, Coppens M (2009) Dynamic Monte Carlo simulations of binary self-diffusion in ZSM-5. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 125:149–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Liu Z, Wang C, Sun T (2010) Production sequencing of mixed-model assembly lines based on simulated annealing algorithm. Proc of the Intl Conf of Logistics Eng and Manage 387: 1803–1808Google Scholar
  40. Lombardi MJ (2007) Bayesian inference for [Alpha]-stable distributions: a random walk MCMC approach. Comput Stat and Data Anal 51:2688–2700MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Malve O, Laine M, Haario H, Kirkkala T, Sarvala J (2007) Bayesian modelling of algal mass occurrences - using adaptive MCMC methods with a lake water quality model. Environ Modell Softw 22:966–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Marwala T (2010) Finite Element Model Updating Using Computational Intelligence Techniques. Springer, LondonMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mathe P, Novak E (2007) Simple Monte Carlo and the metropolis algorithm. J Complex 23: 673–696MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McClarren RG, Urbatsch TJ (2009) A Modified implicit Monte Carlo method for time-dependent radiative transfer with adaptive material Coupling. J Comput Phys 228:5669–5686MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McGookin EW, Murray-Smith DJ (2006) Submarine manoeuvring controllers' optimisation using simulated annealing and genetic algorithms. Control Eng Pract 14:01–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Meer K (2007) Simulated annealing versus metropolis for a TSP instance. Inf Process Lett 104:216–219MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Metropolis N, Rosenbluth A, Rosenbluth M (1953) A. Teller, and E. Teller, equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J Chem Phys 21:1087–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Meyer R, Cai B, Perron F (2008) Adaptive rejection metropolis sampling using Lagrange interpolation polynomials of degree 2. Comput Stat Data Anal 52:3408–3423MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Moita JMS, Correia VMF, Martins PG, Soares CMM, Soares CAM (2006) Optimal design in vibration control of adaptive structures using a simulated annealing algorithm. Compos Struct 75:79–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Moskovkin P, Hou M (2007) Metropolis Monte Carlo predictions of free Co-Pt nanoclusters. J Alloys Compd 434–435:550–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Naderi B, Zandieh M, Khaleghi A, Balagh G, Roshanaei V (2009) An improved simulated annealing for hybrid flowshops with sequence-dependent setup and transportation times to minimize total completion time and total tardiness. Expert Syst Appl 36:9625–9633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nearchou AC (2011) Maximizing production rate and workload smoothing in assembly lines using particle swarm optimization. Int J Prod Econ 129:242–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nocedal J, Wright S (2000) Numerical Optimization. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  54. Ogura T, Sato C (2006) A fully automatic 3D reconstruction method using simulated annealing enables accurate posterioric angular assignment of protein projections. J Struct Biol 156: 371–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Oliveira RG, Schneck E, Quinn BE, Konovalov OV, Brandenburg K, Seydel U, Gill T, Hanna CB, Pink DA, Tanaka M (2009) Physical mechanisms of bacterial survival revealed by combined grazing-incidence X-ray scattering and Monte Carlo simulation. C R Chim 12:209–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pawlak Z (1991) Rough Sets, Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Data. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. Paya-Zaforteza I, Yepes V, Hospitaler A, Gonzalez-Vidosa F (2009) CO2-Optimization of reinforced concrete frames by simulated annealing. Eng Struct 31:1501–1508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pedamallu CS, Ozdamar L (2008) Investigating a hybrid simulated annealing and local search algorithm for constrained optimization. Eur J Oper Res 185:1230–1245MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Qi J-Y (2010) Application of improved simulated annealing algorithm in facility layout design. In: Proceedings of the 29th Chinese Control Conference, pp 5224–5227, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  60. Raghavendra R, Dorizzi B, Rao A, Hemantha Kumar G (2011) Particle swarm optimization based fusion of near infrared and visible images for improved face verification. Pattern Recog 44: 401–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rahmati M, Modarress H (2009) Nitrogen adsorption on nanoporous zeolites studied by grand canonical Monte Carlo simulation. J Mol Struct THEOCHEM 901:110–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ratick S, Schwarz G (2009) Monte Carlo simulation. In: Kitchin R, Thrift N (eds) International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  63. Raymond JW, Holsworth DD, Jalaie M (2011) The flexible alignment of molecular structures using simulated annealing with weighted lagrangian multipliers. J Comput Chem 32:210–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sacco WF, Lapa CMF, Pereira CMNA, Filho HA (2008) A metropolis algorithm applied to a nuclear power plant auxiliary feedwater system surveillance tests policy optimization. Prog Nucl Energ 50:15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Salamon P, Sibani P, Frost R (2002) Facts, Conjectures, and Improvements for Simulated Annealing (SIAM Monographs on Mathematical Modeling and Computation). Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematic Publishers, PhiladelphiaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Salazar R, Toral R (2006) Simulated annealing using hybrid Monte Carlo. arXiv:cond-mat/ 9706051Google Scholar
  67. Seyed-Alagheband SA, Ghomi SMTF, Zandieh M (2011) A simulated annealing algorithm for balancing the assembly line type II problem with sequence-dependent setup times between tasks. Intl J Prod Res 49:805–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Singh U, Kumar H, Kamal TS (2010) Design of Yagi-Uda antenna using biogeography based optimization. IEEE Trans Antennas Propag 58:3375–3379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sonmez FO (2007) Shape optimization of 2D structures using simulated annealing. Comput Meth Appl Mech Eng 196:3279–3299MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tiano G, Sutto L, Broglia RA (2007) Use of the Metropolis Algorithm to Simulate the Dynamics of Protein Chains. Physica A: Statistical Mech and its Appl 380:241–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. van Laarhoven PJ, Aarts EH (1997) Simulated Annealing: Theory and Applications (Mathematics and Its Applications). Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  72. Wang M, Zeng W (2010) A comparison of four popular heuristics for task scheduling problem in computational grid. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference. on Wireless Communication, Networking and Mobile Computing, pp 500–507, ChengduGoogle Scholar
  73. Weinberger E (1990) Correlated and uncorrelated fitness landscapes and how to tell the difference. Biol Cybernet 63:325–336MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wei-Zhong A, Xi-Gang Y (2009) A simulated annealing-based approach to the optimal synthesis of heat-integrated distillation sequences. Comput Chem Eng 33:199–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Weizhong AN, Fengjuan YU, Dong F, Yangdong HU (2008) Simulated annealing approach to the optimal synthesis of distillation column with intermediate heat exchangers. Chin J Chem Eng 16:30–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Xia J, Liu L, Xue J, Wang Y, Wu L (2009) Modeling of radiation-induced bystander effect using Monte Carlo methods. Nucl Instr Method Phys Res Sect B: Beam Interact Mater Atoms 267:1015–1018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Xu Y, Qu R (2011) Solving multi-objective multicast routing Problems by evolutionary multi-objective simulated annealing algorithms with variable neighbourhoods. J Oper Res Soc 62:313–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Yang Z, Kang L (2010) Application and comparison of several intelligent algorithms on muskingum routing model. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Information and Financial Engineering, pp 910–914, ChongqingGoogle Scholar
  79. Ying K-C, Lin S-W, Lu C-C (2011) Cell formation using a simulated annealing algorithm with variable neighbourhood. Euro J Ind Eng 5:22–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Zhang R, Wu C (2011) A simulated annealing algorithm based on block properties for the job shop scheduling problem with total weighted tardiness objective. Comp Oper Res 38:854–867MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zhao H, Zheng C (2009) Correcting the Multi-Monte Carlo method for particle coagulation. Powder Technol 193:120–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of JohannesburgJohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations