Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Monitored convergence curve: a new framework for metaheuristic structural optimization algorithms

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Metaheuristic optimization algorithms, by nature, depend on random processes, and therefore, performing numerous algorithm runs is inevitable to locate a reasonably good solution. Although executing the algorithms for small-size or trivial structural optimization problems could be computationally affordable, when dealing with challenging optimization problems, there is almost no chance of performing numerous independent runs of metaheuristics in a timely manner. This difficulty is basically due to the limitations in computational technologies as well as the excessive computational cost of such problems. In such cases that the number of independent runs is limited to a small number, each optimization run becomes highly valuable and, therefore, the stability of results becomes much more significant. In the present study, it is attempted to monitor the convergence curve of each succeeding run of the algorithm with respect to the information obtained in the previous runs. An easy-to-implement yet efficient framework is proposed for metaheuristic structural optimization algorithms where every succeeding run is monitored at certain intervals named as solution monitoring period. The solution monitoring period is selected such that, at each run, on the one hand, the algorithm could explore the search space to improve the solution quality, and on the other hand, the algorithm is occasionally forced to return to the previously visited more promising solutions if it is not able to improve the solution after a certain number of iterations. The numerical experiments using challenging test instances with up to 354 design variables indicate that, in general, the proposed approach helps to improve the solution quality as well as the robustness or stability of results in metaheuristic structural optimization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), (1994), Manual of steel construction, load & resistance factor design, 2nd ed., Chicago

  • Bellman RE (1957) Dynamic programming. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chen S, Montgomery J, Antonio B-R (2015) Measuring the curse of dimensionality and its effects on particle swarm optimization and differential evolution. Appl Intell 42:514–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colorni, A., Dorigo, M., Maniezzo, V. (1991), Distributed optimization by ant colony. In: Proceedings of the first European conference on artificial life, USA, p. 134–142

  • Csébfalvi A (2012) Kolmogorov-Smirnov test to tackle fair comparison of heuristic approaches in structural optimization. Int J Optim Civil Eng 2(1):137–152

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 and Evolutionary Computation 1:3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erol OK, Eksin I (2006) A new optimization method: big bang-big crunch. Adv Eng Softw 37:106–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gholizadeh S, Samavati OA (2011) Structural optimization by wavelet transforms and neural networks. Appl Math Model 35:915–929

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, D.E., Samtani, M.P. (1986), Engineering optimization via genetic algorithm. Proceeding of the Ninth Conference on Electronic Computation, ASCE, 471–82

  • Haftka RT, Villanueva D, Chaudhuri A (2016) Parallel surrogate-assisted global optimization with expensive functions—a survey. Struct Multidiscip Optim 54:3–13

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hasançebi O, Kazemzadeh Azad S (2012) An exponential big bang-big crunch algorithm for discrete design optimization of steel frames. Comput Struct 110–111:167–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasançebi O, Kazemzadeh Azad S (2014) Discrete size optimization of steel trusses using a refined big bang–big crunch algorithm. Eng Optim 46(1):61–83

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hasançebi O, Kazemzadeh Azad S (2015) Adaptive dimensional search: a new metaheuristic algorithm for discrete truss sizing optimization. Comput Struct 154:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasançebi O, Bahçecioğlu T, Kurç Ö, Saka MP (2011) Optimum design of high-rise steel buildings using an evolution strategy integrated parallel algorithm. Comput Struct 89:2039–2051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaveh A, Boland-Gerami A (2017) Optimal design of large-scale space steel frames using cascade enhanced colliding body optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55:237–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazemzadeh Azad S (2017) Enhanced hybrid metaheuristic algorithms for optimal sizing of steel truss structures with numerous discrete variables. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55:2159–2180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazemzadeh Azad S (2018) Seeding the initial population with feasible solutions in metaheuristic optimization of steel trusses. Eng Optim 50:89–105

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kazemzadeh Azad S, Hasançebi O (2014) Optimum design of skeletal structures using metaheuristics: a survey of the state-of-the-art. International Journal of Engineering & Applied Sciences 6:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, J., Eberhart, R. (1995), Particle swarm optimization. In: IEEE international conference on neural networks, IEEE Press; 1942–48

  • Le Riche R, Haftka RT (1993) Optimization of laminate stacking sequence for buckling load maximization by genetic algorithm. AIAA J 31(5):951–956

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lee KS, Geem ZW (2004) A new structural optimization method based on the harmony search algorithm. Comput Struct 82:781–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Migdalas A, Toraldo G, Kumar V (2003) Nonlinear optimization and parallel computing. Parallel Comput 29:375–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pardalos PM (1989) Parallel search algorithms in global optimization. Appl Math Comput 29:219–229

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Park HS, Sung CW (2002) Optimization of steel structures using distributed simulated annealing algorithm on a cluster of personal computers. Comput Struct 80:1305–1316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schutte JF, Haftka RT, Fregly BJ (2007) Improved global convergence probability using multiple independent optimizations. International Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering 71(6):678–702

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Shan S, Wang GG (2010) Survey of modeling and optimization strategies to solve high-dimensional design problems with computationally-expensive black-box functions. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41:219–241

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sheskin, D.J., Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures, 4th ed., Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2006

  • Stolpe M (2016) Truss optimization with discrete design variables: a critical review. Struct Multidiscip Optim 53:349–374

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Tenne Y, Goh C-K (eds) (2010) Computational intelligence in expensive optimization problems. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Topping BHV, Leite JPB (1998) Parallel genetic models for structural optimization. Eng Opt 31:65–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truong V-H, Nguyen P-C, Kim S-E (2017) An efficient method for optimizing space steel frames with semi-rigid joints using practical advanced analysis and the micro-genetic algorithm. J Constr Steel Res 128:416–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavala GR, Nebro AJ, Luna F, Coello Coello CA (2014) A survey of multi-objective metaheuristics applied to structural optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 49:537–558

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., Wang, S., Ji, G. (2015), A comprehensive survey on particle swarm optimization algorithm and its applications, Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Article ID: 931256

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Atilim University, Ankara, Turkey

    Saeid Kazemzadeh Azad

Authors
  1. Saeid Kazemzadeh Azad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saeid Kazemzadeh Azad.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Qing Li

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Additional data for replication of the test examples are available as supplementary material.

ESM 1

(MAT 483 bytes)

ESM 2

(MAT 592 bytes)

ESM 3

(MAT 1 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Azad, S.K. Monitored convergence curve: a new framework for metaheuristic structural optimization algorithms. Struct Multidisc Optim 60, 481–499 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02219-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02219-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation