Advertisement

A Hybridization of Sine Cosine Algorithm with Steady State Genetic Algorithm for Engineering Design Problems

  • M. A. El-Shorbagy
  • M. A. FaragEmail author
  • A. A. Mousa
  • I. M. El-Desoky
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 921)

Abstract

Sine Cosine Algorithm (SCA), a newly proposed optimization approach, has gained the interest of researchers to solve the optimization problems in different fields due to its efficiency and simplicity. As well as a genetic algorithm (GA) has proved its robustness in solving a large variety of complex optimization problems. In this paper, a hybridization of SCA with steady state genetic algorithm (SSGA) is proposed to solve engineering design problems. This approach integrates the merits of exploration capability of SCA and exploitation capability of SSGA to avoid exposure to early convergence, speed up the search process and quick the convergence to best results in a reasonable time. The proposed approach incorporates concepts from SSGA and SCA and generates individuals in a new generation by crossover and mutation operations of SSGA and also by mechanisms of SCA. Efficiency of the proposed algorithm is evaluated using two complex engineering design problems to verify its validity and reliability. Results show that the proposed approach has superior performance compared to other optimizations techniques.

Keywords

Sine Cosine Algorithm Steady state genetic algorithm Engineering design problems Optimization algorithms 

References

  1. 1.
    Rao, S.S.: Engineering Optimization: Theory and Practice. Wiley, Hoboken (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yang, X.S., Hossein Gandomi, A.: Bat algorithm: a novel approach for global engineering optimization. Eng. Comput. 29(5), 464–483 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rizk-Allah, R.M.: Hybridizing sine cosine algorithm with multi-orthogonal search strategy for engineering design problems. J. Comput. Des. Eng. 5(2), 249–273 (2018)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Droste, S., Jansen, T., Wegener, I.: Upper and lower bounds for randomized search heuristics in black-box optimization. Theor. Comput. Syst. 39(4), 525–544 (2006)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Holland, J.: Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Application to Biology, Control and Artificial Intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge (1975)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    He, B., Che, L., Liu, C.: Novel hybrid shuffled frog leaping and differential evolution algorithm. Jisuanji Gongcheng yu Yingyong (Comput. Eng. Appl.) 47(18), 4–8 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eberhart, R., Kennedy, J.: A new optimizer using particle swarm theory. In: 1995 Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro Machine and Human Science, MHS 1995, pp. 39–43. IEEE, October 1995‏Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lenin, K., Reddy, B.R., Kalavathi, M.S.: Modified monkey optimization algorithm for solving optimal reactive power dispatch problem. Indones. J. Electr. Eng. Inform. (IJEEI) 3(2), 55–62 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhou, Y., Wang, J., Gao, S., Yang, X., Yin, J.: Improving artificial bee colony algorithm with historical archive. In: Gong, M., Pan, L., Song, T., Zhang, G. (eds.) Bio-Inspired Computing-Theories and Applications, pp. 185–190. Springer, Singapore (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xu, H., Liu, X., Su, J.: An improved grey wolf optimizer algorithm integrated with cuckoo Search. In: 2017 9th IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems: Technology and Applications (IDAACS), vol. 1, pp. 490–493. IEEE, September 2017‏Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mirjalili, S.: SCA: a sine cosine algorithm for solving optimization problems. Knowl.-Based Syst. 96, 120–133 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Monteiro-Filho, J.B., Albuquerque, I.M.C., Neto, F.L.: Fish School Search Algorithm for Constrained Optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06169 (2017)
  13. 13.
    Mirjalili, S., Mirjalili, S.M., Yang, X.S.: Binary bat algorithm. Neural Comput. Appl. 25(3–4), 663–681 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, H., Wang, W., Sun, H., Cui, Z., Rahnamayan, S., Zeng, S.: A new cuckoo search algorithm with hybrid strategies for flow shop scheduling problems. Soft. Comput. 21(15), 4297–4307 (2017)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hoos, H.H., Stützle, T.: Stochastic local search: Foundations and applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mousa, A.A., El-Shorbagy, M.A., Farag, M.A.: K-means-clustering based evolutionary algorithm for multi-objective resource allocation problems. Appl. Math 11(6), 1681–1692 (2017)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Farag, M.A., El-Shorbagy, M.A., El-Desoky, I.M., El-Sawy, A.A., Mousa, A.A.: Binary-real coded genetic algorithm based k-Means clustering for unit commitment problem. Appl. Math. 6(11), 1873 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hussein, M.A., EL-Sawy, A.A., Zaki, E.S.M., Mousa, A.A.: Genetic algorithm and rough sets based hybrid approach for economic environmental dispatch of power systems. Br. J. Math. Comput. Sci. 4(20), 2978 (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Renner, G., Ekárt, A.: Genetic algorithms in computer aided design. Comput. Aided Des. 35(8), 709–726 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Iqbal, S., Hoque, M.T.: hGRGA: a scalable genetic algorithm using homologous gene schema replacement. Swarm Evol. Comput. 34, 33–49 (2017)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lozano, M., Herrera, F., Cano, J.R.: Replacement strategies to preserve useful diversity in steady-state genetic algorithms. Inf. Sci. 178(23), 4421–4433 (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Farag, M.A., El-Shorbagy, M.A., El-Desoky, I.M., El-Sawy, A.A., Mousa, A.A.: Genetic algorithm based on k-means-clustering technique for multi-objective resource allocation problems. Br. J. Math. Comput. Sci. 8(1), 80–96 (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Elattar, E.E.: A hybrid genetic algorithm and bacterial foraging approach for dynamic economic dispatch problem. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 69, 18–26 (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Altiparmak, F., Gen, M., Lin, L., Karaoglan, I.: A steady-state genetic algorithm for multi-product supply chain network design. Comput. Ind. Eng. 56(2), 521–537 (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nenavath, H., Jatoth, R. K., Das, S.: A synergy of the sine-cosine algorithm and particle swarm optimizer for improved global optimization and object tracking. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation (2018)‏Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gen, M., Cheng, R.: Genetic Algorithms and Engineering Optimization, vol. 7. Wiley, Hoboken (2000)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Martorell, S., Carlos, S., Sanchez, A., Serradell, V.: Constrained optimization of test intervals using a steady-state genetic algorithm. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 67(3), 215–232 (2000)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ekiz, S.: Solving constrained optimization problems with sine-cosine algorithm. Period. Eng. Nat. Sci. (PEN) 5(3), 378–386 (2017)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Osman, M.S., Abo-Sinna, M.A., Mousa, A.A.: A solution to the optimal power flow using genetic algorithm. Appl. Math. Comput. 155(2), 391–405 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mousa, A.A., Kotb, K.A.: A hybrid optimization technique coupling an evolutionary and a local search algorithm for economic emission load dispatch problem. Appl. Math. 2(07), 890 (2011)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gandomi, A.H., Yang, X.S., Alavi, A.H.: Cuckoo search algorithm: a metaheuristic approach to solve structural optimization problems. Engineering with Computers 29(1), 17–35 (2013)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Brajević, I., Ignjatović, J.: An upgraded firefly algorithm with feasibility-based rules for constrained engineering optimization problems. J. Intell. Manuf. 1–30 (2018)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ferreira, M.P., Rocha, M.L., Neto, A.J.S., Sacco, W.F.: A constrained ITGO heuristic applied to engineering optimization. Expert Syst. Appl. 110, 106–124 (2018)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Akay, B., Karaboga, D.: Artificial bee colony algorithm for large-scale problems and engineering design optimization. J. Intell. Manuf. 23(4), 1001–1014 (2012)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yang, X.S.: Engineering Optimization: An Introduction with Metaheuristic Applications. Wiley, Hoboken (2010)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Guedria, N.B.: Improved accelerated PSO algorithm for mechanical engineering optimization problems. Appl. Soft Comput. 40, 455–467 (2016)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Arora, J.S.: Introduction to Optimum Design. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wu, L., Liu, Q., Tian, X., Zhang, J., Xiao, W.: A new improved fruit fly optimization algorithm IAFOA and its application to solve engineering optimization problems. Knowl.-Based Syst. 144, 153–173 (2018)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mahdavi, M., Fesanghary, M., Damangir, E.: An improved harmony search algorithm for solving optimization problems. Appl. Math. Comput. 188(2), 1567–1579 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wei-Shang, G.A.O., Cheng, S.H.A.O.: Iterative dynamic diversity evolutionary algorithm for constrained optimization. Acta Automatica Sin. 40(11), 2469–2479 (2014)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mirjalili, S., Gandomi, A.H., Mirjalili, S.Z., Saremi, S., Faris, H., Mirjalili, S.M.: Salp swarm algorithm: a bio-inspired optimizer for engineering design problems. Adv. Eng. Softw. 114, 163–191 (2017)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Huang, F.Z., Wang, L., He, Q.: An effective co-evolutionary differential evolution for constrained optimization. Appl. Math. Comput. 186(1), 340–356 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wang, Y., Cai, Z., Zhou, Y.: Accelerating adaptive trade-off model using shrinking space technique for constrained evolutionary optimization. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng. 77(11), 1501–1534 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Long, W., Jiao, J., Liang, X., Tang, M.: Inspired grey wolf optimizer for solving large-scale function optimization problems. Appl. Math. Model. 60, 112–126 (2018)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wang, L., Li, L.P.: An effective differential evolution with level comparison for constrained engineering design. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 41(6), 947–963 (2010)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    He, Q., Wang, L.: An effective co-evolutionary particle swarm optimization for constrained engineering design problems. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 20(1), 89–99 (2007)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mezura-Montes, E., Coello, C.A.C.: Useful infeasible solutions in engineering optimization with evolutionary algorithms. In: Mexican International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 652–662. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, November 2005Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sadollah, A., Bahreininejad, A., Eskandar, H., Hamdi, M.: Mine blast algorithm: a new population based algorithm for solving constrained engineering optimization problems. Appl. Soft Comput. 13(5), 2592–2612 (2013)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Mirjalili, S., Mirjalili, S.M., Lewis, A.: Grey wolf optimizer. Adv. Eng. Softw. 69, 46–61 (2014)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    El Aziz, M.A., Ewees, A.A., Hassanien, A.E.: Whale optimization algorithm and moth-flame optimization for multilevel thresholding image segmentation. Expert Syst. Appl. 83, 242–256 (2017)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tharwat, A., Hassanien, A.E., Elnaghi, B.E.: A ba-based algorithm for parameter optimization of support vector machine. Pattern Recogn. Lett. 93, 13–22 (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. A. El-Shorbagy
    • 1
    • 2
  • M. A. Farag
    • 2
    Email author
  • A. A. Mousa
    • 2
    • 3
  • I. M. El-Desoky
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics, College of Science and Humanities StudiesPrince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz UniversityAl-KharjKingdom of Saudi Arabia
  2. 2.Department of Basic Engineering Science, Faculty of EngineeringMenoufia UniversityShebin El-KomEgypt
  3. 3.Mathematics and Statistics Department, Faculty of ScienceTaif UniversityTaifKingdom of Saudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations