Advertisement

Soft Computing

, Volume 23, Issue 15, pp 6023–6041 | Cite as

Opposition-based moth flame optimization with Cauchy mutation and evolutionary boundary constraint handling for global optimization

  • Saunhita SapreEmail author
  • S. Mini
Foundations

Abstract

Moth flame optimization (MFO) algorithm proves to be an excellent choice for numerical optimization. However, for some complex objectives, MFO may get trapped in local optima or suffer from premature convergence. In order to overcome these issues, an improved MFO-based algorithm, called opposition-based moth flame optimization with Cauchy mutation and evolutionary boundary constraint handling (OMFO), is presented. The proposed method integrates opposition-based learning (OBL) with Cauchy mutation (CM) and evolution boundary constraint handling (EBCH) technique with MFO to improve its performance. OBL and EBCH improve the convergence of MFO, while CM helps MFO to escape local optima. The effect of each method (OBL, CM, EBCH) on MFO is validated using 18 benchmark functions and two constrained real-world problems. Simulation results indicate that opposition-based MFO integrated with Cauchy mutation and EBCH has the best performance among the MFO variants. The OMFO algorithm is also compared with various algorithms in the literature and provides competitive results in terms of increased exploitation and exploration capability, improved convergence and local optima avoidance.

Keywords

Moth flame optimization Opposition-based learning Cauchy mutation Evolutionary boundary constraint handling Constrained optimization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions and comments that helped to improve the quality of the paper.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ali M, Pant M (2011) Improving the performance of differential evolution algorithm using cauchy mutation. Soft Comput 15(5):991–1007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Askarzadeh A (2016) A novel metaheuristic method for solving constrained engineering optimization problems: crow search algorithm. Comput Struct 169:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Awad NH, Ali MZ, Suganthan PN, Reynolds RG (2017) Cade: a hybridization of cultural algorithm and differential evolution for numerical optimization. Inf Sci 378:215–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baykasoğlu A, Akpinar Ş (2015) Weighted superposition attraction (WSA): a swarm intelligence algorithm for optimization problems-part 2: constrained optimization. Appl Soft Comput 37:396–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Czerniak JM, Zarzycki H, Ewald D (2017) AAO as a new strategy in modeling and simulation of constructional problems optimization. Simul Model Pract Theory 76:22–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dong W, Kang L, Zhang W (2016) Opposition-based particle swarm optimization with adaptive mutation strategy. Soft Comput 21(17):5081–5090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eberhart R, Kennedy J (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceeding of IEEE international conference on neural network, Perth, pp 1942–1948Google Scholar
  8. El-Abd M (2011) Opposition-based artificial bee colony algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation. ACM, pp 109–116Google Scholar
  9. Elyasigomari V, Lee D, Screen H, Shaheed M (2017) Development of a two-stage gene selection method that incorporates a novel hybrid approach using the cuckoo optimization algorithm and harmony search for cancer classification. J Biomed Inform 67:11–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ergezer M, Simon D, Du D (2009) Oppositional biogeography-based optimization. In: IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics, (SMC) 2009, pp. 1009–1014Google Scholar
  11. Gandomi AH, Alavi AH (2012) Krill herd: a new bio-inspired optimization algorithm. Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul 12(17):4831–4845MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gandomi AH, Kashani AR (2016) Evolutionary bound constraint handling for particle swarm optimization. In: 2016 4th international symposium on computational and business intelligence (ISCBI). IEEE, pp 148–152Google Scholar
  13. Gandomi AH, Yang XS (2011) Benchmark problems in structural optimization. In: Computational optimization, methods and algorithms. Springer, pp 259–281Google Scholar
  14. Gandomi AH, Yang XS (2012) Evolutionary boundary constraint handling scheme. Neural Comput Appl 21(6):1449–1462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gandomi AH, Yang XS, Alavi AH, Talatahari S (2013) Bat algorithm for constrained optimization tasks. Neural Comput Appl 22(6):1239–1255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goldberg DE, Holland JH (1988) Genetic algorithms and machine learning. Mach Learn 3(2):95–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grosan C, Abraham A (2007) Hybrid evolutionary algorithms: methodologies, architectures, and reviews. In: Abraham A, Grosan C, Ishibuchi H (eds) Hybrid evolutionary algorithms. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–17zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. He Q, Wang L (2007) An effective co-evolutionary particle swarm optimization for constrained engineering design problems. Eng Appl Artif Intell 20(1):89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huang F, Wang L, He Q (2007) An effective co-evolutionary differential evolution for constrained optimization. Appl Math Comput 186(1):340–356MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Jabeen H, Jalil Z, Baig AR (2009) Opposition based initialization in Particle Swarm Optimization (o-pso). In: Proceedings of the 11th annual conference companion on genetic and evolutionary computation conference: late breaking papers. ACM, pp 2047–2052Google Scholar
  21. Kaveh A, Bakhshpoori T (2016) Water evaporation optimization: a novel physically inspired optimization algorithm. Comput Struct 167:69–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaveh A, Dadras A (2017) A novel meta-heuristic optimization algorithm: thermal exchange optimization. Adv Eng Softw 110:69–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: IEEE international conference on neural networks. IEEE, vol 4, pp 1942–1948Google Scholar
  24. Khajehzadeh M, Taha MR, Eslami M (2014) Opposition-based firefly algorithm for earth slope stability evaluation. China Ocean Eng 28(5):713–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. KS SR, Murugan S (2017) Memory based hybrid dragonfly algorithm for numerical optimization problems. Expert Syst Appl 83:63–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li X, Yin M (2014) Parameter estimation for chaotic systems by hybrid differential evolution algorithm and artificial bee colony algorithm. Nonlinear Dyn 1(77):61–71MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liang J, Qu B, Suganthan P, Hernández-Díaz AG (2013) Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2013 special session on real-parameter optimizationGoogle Scholar
  28. Liang J, Qu B, Suganthan P, Chen Q (2014) Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2015 competition on learning-based real-parameter single objective optimizationGoogle Scholar
  29. Lukasik S, Zak S (2009) Firefly algorithm for continuous constrained optimization tasks. In: International conference on computational collective intelligence. Springer, pp 97–106Google Scholar
  30. Mezura-Montes E, Coello CAC, Velzquez-Reyes J, Muoz-Dvila L (2007) Multiple trial vectors in differential evolution for engineering design. Eng Optim 39(5):567–589MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mirjalili S (2015) Moth-flame optimization algorithm: a novel nature-inspired heuristic paradigm. Knowl Based Syst 89:228–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mirjalili S, Gandomi AH (2017) Chaotic gravitational constants for the gravitational search algorithm. Appl Soft Comput 53:407–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Hatamlou A (2016) Multi-verse optimizer: a nature-inspired algorithm for global optimization. Neural Comput Appl 27(2):495–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Qin A, Huang V, Suganthan P (2009) Differential evolution algorithm with strategy adaptation for global numerical optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 13(2):398–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rahnamayan S, Tizhoosh HR, Salama MM (2008) Opposition-based differential evolution. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 12(1):64–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rashedi E, Nezamabadi-Pour H, Saryazdi S (2009) GSA: a gravitational search algorithm. Inf Sci 179(13):2232–2248zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ros R, Hansen N (2008) A simple modification in CMA-ES achieving linear time and space complexity. In: International conference on parallel problem solving from nature. Springer, pp 296–305Google Scholar
  38. Roy PK, Paul C, Sultana S (2014) Oppositional teaching learning based optimization approach for combined heat and power dispatch. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 57:392–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sarkhel R, Chowdhury TM, Das M, Das N, Nasipuri M (2017) A novel harmony search algorithm embedded with metaheuristic opposition based learning. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 32(4):3189–3199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Satapathy P, Dhar S, Dash PK (2017) Stability improvement of PV-BESS diesel generator-based microgrid with a new modified harmony search-based hybrid firefly algorithm. IET Renew Power Gener 11:566–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shan X, Liu K, Sun P (2016) Modified bat algorithm based on Levy flight and opposition based learning. Sci Programm Neth. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8031560
  42. Shaw B, Mukherjee V, Ghoshal S (2012) A novel opposition-based gravitational search algorithm for combined economic and emission dispatch problems of power systems. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 35(1):21–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Simon D (2008) Biogeography-based optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 12(6):702–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution—a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Global Optim 11(4):341–359MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Suganthan PN, Hansen N, Liang JJ, Deb K, Chen YP, Auger A, Tiwari S (2005) Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2005 special session on real-parameter optimization. KanGAL report 2005005:2005Google Scholar
  46. Tanabe R, Fukunaga AS (2014) Improving the search performance of shade using linear population size reduction. In: 2014 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC). IEEE, pp 1658–1665Google Scholar
  47. Verma OP, Aggarwal D, Patodi T (2016) Opposition and dimensional based modified firefly algorithm. Expert Syst Appl 44:168–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang G, Guo L (2013) A novel hybrid bat algorithm with harmony search for global numerical optimization. J Appl Math.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/696491
  49. Wang L, Li L (2010) An effective differential evolution with level comparison for constrained engineering design. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41(6):947–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wang X, Duan H, Luo D (2013) Cauchy biogeography-based optimization based on lateral inhibition for image matching. Optik Int J Light Electron Optics 124(22):5447–5453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wang GG, Gandomi AH, Alavi AH (2014a) An effective krill herd algorithm with migration operator in biogeography-based optimization. Appl Math Model 38(9):2454–2462MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang GG, Gandomi AH, Alavi AH (2014b) Stud krill herd algorithm. Neurocomputing 128:363–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wang GG, Deb S, Gandomi AH, Alavi AH (2016) Opposition-based krill herd algorithm with cauchy mutation and position clamping. Neurocomputing 177:147–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yang XS (2009) Firefly algorithms for multimodal optimization. In: International symposium on stochastic algorithms. Springer, pp 169–178Google Scholar
  55. Yang XS (2010a) A new metaheuristic bat-inspired algorithm. Nature inspired cooperative strategies for optimization (NICSO 2010), pp 65–74Google Scholar
  56. Yang XS (2010b) Firefly algorithm. In: Engineering optimization. Wiley, New York, pp 221–230Google Scholar
  57. Yu X, Cai M, Cao J (2015) A novel mutation differential evolution for global optimization. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 28(3):1047–1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zahara E, Kao YT (2009) Hybrid Nelder–Mead simplex search and particle swarm optimization for constrained engineering design problems. Expert Syst Appl 36(2, Part 2):3880–3886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhang J, Sanderson AC (2009) Jade: adaptive differential evolution with optional external archive. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 13(5):945–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zhang Q, Wang R, Yang J, Ding K, Li Y, Hu J (2017) Collective decision optimization algorithm: a new heuristic optimization method. Neurocomputing 221:123–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zhou J, Fang W, Wu X, Sun J, Cheng S (2016) An opposition-based learning competitive particle swarm optimizer. In: 2016 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC). IEEE, pp. 515–521Google Scholar
  62. Zhou Y, Hao JK, Duval B (2017) Opposition-based memetic search for the maximum diversity problem. IEEE Trans Evol ComputGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringNational Institute of Technology GoaGoaIndia

Personalised recommendations