Skip to main content
Log in

A multi-agent optimization algorithm and its application to training multilayer perceptron models

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Evolving Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The optimal parameter values in a feed-forward neural network model play an important role in determining the efficiency and significance of the trained model. In this paper, we propose an upgraded artificial electric field algorithm (AEFA) for training feed-forward neural network models. This paper also throws some light on the effective use of multi-agent meta-heuristic techniques for the training of neural network models and their future prospects. Seven real-life data sets are used to train neural network models, the results of these trained models show that the proposed scheme performs well in comparison to other training algorithms in terms of high classification accuracy and minimum test error values including gradient-based algorithms and differential evolution variants. Some fundamental modifications in AEFA are also proposed to make it more suitable for training neural networks. All the experimental findings show that the search capabilities and convergence rate of the proposed scheme are better than those of other capable schemes, including gradient-based schemes.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

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
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availibility

This work does not include any generated data. For Case study data available with UCI Machine learning repository.

References

  • Agahian S, Akan T (2022) Battle royale optimizer for training multi-layer perceptron. Evol Syst 13(4):563–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aggarwal CC et al (2018) Neural networks and deep learning. Springer, New York, pp 978–983

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Agnes Lydia, Sagayaraj Francis (2019) Adagrad-an optimizer for stochastic gradient descent. Int J Inf Comput Sci 6(5):566–568

    Google Scholar 

  • Ali Khosravi, Sanna Syri (2020) Modeling of geothermal power system equipped with absorption refrigeration and solar energy using multilayer perceptron neural network optimized with imperialist competitive algorithm. J Clean Prod 276:124216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alireza Askarzadeh (2016) A novel metaheuristic method for solving constrained engineering optimization problems: crow search algorithm. Comput Struct 169:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altay O, Altay EV (2023) A novel hybrid multilayer perceptron neural network with improved grey wolf optimizer. Neural Comput Appl 35(1):529–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anita, Yadav A (2019) Aefa: artificial electric field algorithm for global optimization. Swarm Evol Comput 48:93–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anita, Yadav A (2020) Discrete artificial electric field algorithm for high-order graph matching. Appl Soft Comput 92:106260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anupam Yadav, Nitin Kumar et al (2020) Artificial electric field algorithm for engineering optimization problems. Expert Syst Appl 149:113308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arjen Van Ooyen, Bernard Nienhuis (1992) Improving the convergence of the back-propagation algorithm. Neural Netw 5(3):465–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baoxian Liang, Yunlong Zhao, Yang Li (2021) A hybrid particle swarm optimization with crisscross learning strategy. Eng Appl Artif Intell 105:104418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake CL (1998) UCI repository of machine learning databases. http://www.ics.uci.edu/~mlearn/MLRepository.html

  • Blum C, Socha K (2005) Training feed-forward neural networks with ant colony optimization: An application to pattern classification. In Fifth International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems (HIS’05), IEEE. p. 6

  • Bohat VK, Arya KV (2018) An effective gbest-guided gravitational search algorithm for real-parameter optimization and its application in training of feedforward neural networks. Knowl-Based Syst 143:192–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chauhan D, Yadav A (2022a) Binary artificial electric field algorithm. Evol Intel. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12065-022-00726-x

  • Chauhan D, Yadav A (2022b) Xor-based binary aefa: Theoretical studies and applications. In 2022 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI), IEEE. p. 1706–1713

  • Chauhan D, Yadav A (2023a) Optimizing the parameters of hybrid active power filters through a comprehensive and dynamic multi-swarm gravitational search algorithm. Eng Appl Artif Intell 123:106469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chauhan D, Yadav A (2023b) An adaptive artificial electric field algorithm for continuous optimization problems. Expert Syst e13380. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.13380

  • De Souto MCP, Costa IG, de Araujo DSA, Ludermir TB, Schliep A (2008) Clustering cancer gene expression data: a comparative study. BMC Bioinformatics 9(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deo RC, Ghorbani MA, Samadianfard S, Maraseni T, Bilgili M, Biazar M (2018) Multi-layer perceptron hybrid model integrated with the firefly optimizer algorithm for windspeed prediction of target site using a limited set of neighboring reference station data. Renew Energy 116:309–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diederik K, Jimmy B (2014) Adam: a method for stochastic optimization, pp 273–297. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980

  • ElSaid A, Jamiy FE, Higgins J, Wild B, Desell T (2018) Optimizing long short-term memory recurrent neural networks using ant colony optimization to predict turbine engine vibration. Appl Soft Comput 73:969–991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esmat Rashedi, Hossein Nezamabadi-Pour, Saeid Saryazdi (2009) Gsa: a gravitational search algorithm. Inf Sci 179(13):2232–2248

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fahlman SE et al (1988) An empirical study of learning speed in back-propagation networks. Computer Science Department. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Fine TL (1999) Algorithms for designing feedforward networks. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • García-Ródenas R, Linares LJ, López-Gómez JA (2021) Memetic algorithms for training feedforward neural networks: an approach based on gravitational search algorithm. Neural Comput Appl 33(7):2561–2588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner MW, Dorling SR (1998) Artificial neural networks (the multilayer perceptron)-a review of applications in the atmospheric sciences. Atmos Environ 32(14–15):2627–2636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gudise VG, Venayagamoorthy GK (2003) Comparison of particle swarm optimization and backpropagation as training algorithms for neural networks. In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE Swarm Intelligence Symposium. SIS’03 (Cat. No. 03EX706) IEEE. p. 110–117

  • Guo ZX, Wong WK, Li M (2012) Sparsely connected neural network-based time series forecasting. Inf Sci 193:54–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertz J, Krogh A, Palmer RG (2018) Introduction to the theory of neural computation. CRC Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hossam Faris, Ibrahim Aljarah, Seyedali Mirjalili (2016) Training feedforward neural networks using multi-verse optimizer for binary classification problems. Appl Intell 45(2):322–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houssein EH, Helmy BE-D, Elngar AA, Abdelminaam DS, Shaban H (2021) An improved tunicate swarm algorithm for global optimization and image segmentation. IEEE Access 9:56066–56092

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim Aljarah, Hossam Faris, Seyedali Mirjalili (2018) Optimizing connection weights in neural networks using the whale optimization algorithm. Soft Comput 22(1):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jianbo Yu, Shijin Wang, Lifeng Xi (2008) Evolving artificial neural networks using an improved pso and dpso. Neurocomputing 71(4–6):1054–1060

    Google Scholar 

  • Jihoon Yang, Vasant Honavar (1998) Feature subset selection using a genetic algorithm. IEEE Intell Syst Appl 13(2):44–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of ICNN’95-international conference on neural networks, IEEE volume 4. p. 1942–1948

  • Khishe M, Mosavi MR (2020) Chimp optimization algorithm. Expert Syst Appl 149:113338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le HL, Neri F, Triguero I (2022) Spms-als: a single-point memetic structure with accelerated local search for instance reduction. Swarm Evol Comput 69:100991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee Y, Oh S-H, Kim MW (1993) An analysis of premature saturation in back propagation learning. Neural Netw 6(5):719–728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung FH-F, Lam H-K, Ling S-H, Tam PK-S (2003) Tuning of the structure and parameters of a neural network using an improved genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 14(1):79–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang JJ, Qu BY, Suganthan PN (2013) Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the cec 2014 special session and competition on single objective real-parameter numerical optimization. Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou China and Technical Report, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, p 490

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangasarian OL, Wolberg WH (1990) Cancer diagnosis via linear programming. SIAM News 23:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirjalili S (2015) How effective is the grey wolf optimizer in training multi-layer perceptrons. Appl Intell 43(1):150–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirjalili S, Gandomi AH (2017) Chaotic gravitational constants for the gravitational search algorithm. Appl Soft Comput 53:407–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirjalili S, Hashim SZM (2012) Sardroudi HM Training feedforward neural networks using hybrid particle swarm optimization and gravitational search algorithm. Appl Math Comput 218(22):11125–11137

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Mirjalili SM, Abedi K, Mirjalili S (2013) Optical buffer performance enhancement using particle swarm optimization in ring-shape-hole photonic crystal waveguide. Optik 124(23):5989–5993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A (2014) Let a biogeography-based optimizer train your multi-layer perceptron. Inf Sci 269:188–209

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A (2014) Grey wolf optimizer. Adv Eng Softw 69:46–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen H, Moayedi H, Foong LK, Najjar HAHA, Jusoh WAW, Rashid ASA, Jamali J (2020) Optimizing ann models with pso for predicting short building seismic response. Eng Comput 36(3):823–837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patricia Melin, Daniela Sánchez, Oscar Castillo (2012) Genetic optimization of modular neural networks with fuzzy response integration for human recognition. Inf Sci 197:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedro JO, Dangor M, Dahunsi OA, Ali MM (2018) Dynamic neural network-based feedback linearization control of full-car suspensions using pso. Appl Soft Comput 70:723–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qin AK, Huang VL, Suganthan PN (2008) Differential evolution algorithm with strategy adaptation for global numerical optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 13(2):398–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainer Storn, Kenneth Price (1997) Differential evolution-a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Global Optim 11(4):341

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenblatt F (1957) The perceptron: a perceiving and recognizing automaton. Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, Buffalo, New York

  • Saeed Samadianfard, Sajjad Hashemi, Katayoun Kargar, Mojtaba Izadyar, Ali Mostafaeipour, Amir Mosavi, Narjes Nabipour, Shahaboddin Shamshirband (2020) Wind speed prediction using a hybrid model of the multi-layer perceptron and whale optimization algorithm. Energy Rep 6:1147–1159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seiffert U (2001) Multiple layer perceptron training using genetic algorithms. In ESANN, Citeseer. p. 159–164

  • Seyedali Mirjalili (2016) Sca: a sine cosine algorithm for solving optimization problems. Knowl-Based Syst 96:120–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shubham Gupta, Kusum Deep (2020) A novel hybrid sine cosine algorithm for global optimization and its application to train multilayer perceptrons. Appl Intell 50(4):993–1026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shun-ichi Amari (1993) Backpropagation and stochastic gradient descent method. Neurocomputing 5(4–5):185–196

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Singh P, Chaudhury S, Panigrahi BK (2021) Hybrid mpso-cnn: Multi-level particle swarm optimized hyperparameters of convolutional neural network. Swarm Evol Comput 63:100863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stelios Tsafarakis, Konstantinos Zervoudakis, Andreas Andronikidis, Efthymios Altsitsiadis (2020) Fuzzy self-tuning differential evolution for optimal product line design. Eur J Oper Res 287(3):1161–1169

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tae-Young Kim, Sung-Bae Cho (2021) Optimizing cnn-lstm neural networks with pso for anomalous query access control. Neurocomputing 456:666–677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanabe R, Fukunaga A (2013) Success-history based parameter adaptation for differential evolution. In 2013 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, IEEE. p. 71–78

  • Weir MK (1991) A method for self-determination of adaptive learning rates in back propagation. Neural Netw 4(3):371–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werbos P (1974) Beyond regression:" new tools for prediction and analysis in the behavioral sciences. Ph. D. dissertation, Harvard University

  • Wienholt W (1993) Minimizing the system error in feedforward neural networks with evolution strategy. International conference on artificial neural networks. Springer, New York, pp 490–493

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolpert DH, Macready WG (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 1(1):67–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu Y, Li F, Asgari A (2022) Prediction and optimization of heating and cooling loads in a residential building based on multi-layer perceptron neural network and different optimization algorithms. Energy 240:122692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xubin Wang, Yunhe Wang, Ka-Chun Wong, Xiangtao Li (2022) A self-adaptive weighted differential evolution approach for large-scale feature selection. Knowl-Based Syst 235:107633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xue B, Zhang M, Browne WN (2014) Particle swarm optimisation for feature selection in classification: Novel initialisation and updating mechanisms. Appl Soft Comput 18:261–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xue Yu, Bing Xue, Mengjie Zhang (2019) Self-adaptive particle swarm optimization for large-scale feature selection in classification. ACM Trans Knowl Discov Data (TKDD) 13(5):1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xue Yu, Yiling Tong, Ferrante Neri (2022) An ensemble of differential evolution and adam for training feed-forward neural networks. Inf Sci 608:453–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav N, Yadav A, Kumar M, Kim JH (2017) An efficient algorithm based on artificial neural networks and particle swarm optimization for solution of nonlinear troesch’s problem. Neural Comput Appl 28:171–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav A, Kumar N et al (2019) Application of artificial electric field algorithm for economic load dispatch problem. International conference on soft computing and pattern recognition. Springer, New York, pp 71–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Yantao Li, Shaojiang Deng, Di Xiao (2011) A novel hash algorithm construction based on chaotic neural network. Neural Comput Appl 20(1):133–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Q, Yoon S (2022) A novel self-adaptive convolutional neural network model using spatial pyramid pooling for 3d lung nodule computer-aided diagnosis. IISE Trans Healthcare Syst Eng 12(1):75–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The corresponding author is thankful to Science Education Research Board (SERB) for the financial support under MATRICS Scheme with grant number MTR/2021/000503.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anupam Yadav.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

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

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Appendix

Appendix

Function 1

$$\begin{aligned} aK=&[.1957, .1947, .1735, .16, .0844, .0627, .0456, .0342, .0323, .0235, .0246]&\\ bK=&[.25, .5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16]&\\bK1=&1./bK&\\ F1=&sum((aK-((\zeta _{1}(bK1^2+\zeta _{2}bK1))/(bK1^2+\zeta _{3}bK1+\zeta _{4})))^2); \end{aligned}$$

The range of this function is \([-5, 5]\) with dimension 4.

Function 2

$$\begin{aligned} F2=4\zeta _{1}^2-2.1\zeta _{1}^4+\zeta _{1}^6/3+\zeta _{1}\zeta _{2}-4\zeta _{2}^2+4\zeta _{2}^4 \end{aligned}$$

The range of this function is \([-5, 5]\) with dimension 2.

Function 3

$$\begin{aligned} F3=& \left(1+(\zeta _{1}+\zeta _{2}+1)^2(19-14\zeta _{1}+3\zeta _{1}^2-14\zeta _{2}+6\zeta _{1}\zeta _{2}+3\zeta _{2}^2)\right)\\ {}&\left(30+(2\zeta _{1}-3\zeta _{2})^2(18-32\zeta _{1}+12\zeta _{1}^2+48\zeta _{2}-36\zeta _{1}\zeta _{2}+27\zeta _{2}^2)\right) \end{aligned}$$

The range of this function is \([-2, 2]\) with dimension 2.

Function 4

$$\begin{aligned} aH=&[3, 10, 30;.1, 10, 35;3, 10, 30;.1, 10, 35];cH=[1, 1.2, 3, 3.2]\\ pH=&[.3689, .117, .2673;.4699, .4387, .747;.1091, .8732, .5547;.03815, .5743, .8828]\\ F4=&F4-cH(i)exp(-(sum(aH(i,:)((\zeta -pH(i,:))^2)))), i\in \{1,2,3,4\} \end{aligned}$$

The range of this function is [0, 1] with dimension 3.

Function 5

$$\begin{aligned} aH=&[10, 3, 17, 3.5, 1.7, 8;.05, 10, 17, .1, 8, 14;3, 3.5, 1.7, 10, 17, 8;17, 8, .05, 10, .1, 14]\\ cH=&[1, 1.2, 3, 3.2]\\ pH=&[.1312, .1696, .5569, .0124, .8283, .5886;.2329, .4135, .8307, .3736, .1004, .9991;.2348, .1415, .3522, .2883,\\ {}&.3047, .6650;.4047, .8828, .8732, .5743, .1091, .0381]\\ F5=&F5-cH(i)*exp(-(sum(aH(i,:).*((\zeta -pH(i,:))^2)))), \quad i\in \{1,2,3,4\} \end{aligned}$$

The range of this function is [0, 1] with dimension 6.

$$\begin{aligned}{} & {} aSH=[4, 4, 4, 4;1, 1, 1, 1;8, 8, 8, 8;6, 6, 6, 6;3, 7, 3, 7;2, 9, 2, 9;5, 5, 3, 3;8, 1, 8, 1;6, 2, 6, 2;7, 3.6, 7, 3.6]\\{} & {} cSH=[.1,.2,.2,.4,.4,.6,.3,.7,.5,.5]\\ \end{aligned}$$

Function 6

$$\begin{aligned} F6=F6-((\zeta -aSH(i,:))(\zeta -aSH(i,:))'+cSH(i))^{-1},\quad i\in \{1,2,3,4,5\} \end{aligned}$$

The range of this function is [0, 1] with dimension 4.

Function 7

$$\begin{aligned} F7=F7-((\zeta -aSH(i,:))(\zeta -aSH(i,:))'+cSH(i))^{-1}, \quad i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6,7\} \end{aligned}$$

The range of this function is [0, 1] with dimension 4.

Function 8

$$\begin{aligned} F8=F8-((\zeta -aSH(i,:))(\zeta -aSH(i,:))'+cSH(i))^{-1},\quad i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10\} \end{aligned}$$

The range of this function is [0, 1] with dimension 4.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chauhan, D., Yadav, A. & Neri, F. A multi-agent optimization algorithm and its application to training multilayer perceptron models. Evolving Systems (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12530-023-09518-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12530-023-09518-9

Keywords

Navigation