Hypersphere Universe Boundary Method Comparison on HCLPSO and PSO

  • Tomas KadavyEmail author
  • Michal Pluhacek
  • Adam Viktorin
  • Roman Senkerik
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10334)


In this paper, the hypersphere universe method is applied on Heterogeneous Comprehensive Learning Particle Swarm Optimization (HCLPSO) and a classical representative of swarm intelligence Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). The goal is to the compare this method to the classical version of these algorithms. The comparisons are made on CEC’17 benchmark set functions. The experiments were carried out according to CEC benchmark rules and statistically evaluated using Friedman rank test.


Particle Swarm Optimization PSO Heterogeneous Comprehensive Learning HCLPSO Search space boundaries Roaming particles 



This work was supported by Grant Agency of the Czech Republic – GACR P103/15/06700S, further by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic within the National Sustainability Programme Project no. LO1303 (MSMT-7778/2014. Also by the European Regional Development Fund under the Project CEBIA-Tech no. CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0089 and by Internal Grant Agency of Tomas Bata University under the Projects no. IGA/CebiaTech/2017/004.


  1. 1.
    Kennedy, J., Eberhart, R.: Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, pp. 1942–1948 (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lynn, N., Suganthan, P.N.: Heterogeneous comprehensive learning particle swarm optimization with enhanced exploration and exploitation. Swarm Evol. Comput. 24, 11–24 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lynn, N.: Heterogeneous particle swarm optimization with an application of unit commitment in power system, Singapore. Thesis. School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering. Supervisor Ponnuthurai Nagaratnam Suganthan (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Awad, N.H., et al.: Problem Definitions and Evaluation Criteria for CEC 2017 Special Session and Competition on Single-Objective Real-Parameter Numerical Optimization (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kennedy, J.: The particle swarm: social adaptation of knowledge. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 303–308 (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liang, J.J., Qin, A.K., Suganthan, P.N., Baskar, S.: Comprehensive learning particle swarm optimizer for global optimization of multimodal functions. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 10(3), 281–295 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eberhart, R.C., Shi, Y.: Comparing inertia weights and constriction factors in particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC00, pp. 84–88. IEEE (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Friedman, M.: The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicits in the analysis of variance. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 32, 675–701 (1937)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Demsar, J.: Statistical comparisons of classifiers over multiple data sets. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 7, 1–30 (2006)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tomas Kadavy
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michal Pluhacek
    • 1
  • Adam Viktorin
    • 1
  • Roman Senkerik
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Applied InformaticsTomas Bata University in ZlinZlinCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations