This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Global Optimization by Differential Evolution and Particle Swarm Methods: Evaluation on Some Benchmark Functions

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Mishra, SK

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this paper we compare the performance of the Differential Evolution (DE) and the Repulsive Particle Swarm (RPS) methods of global optimization. To this end, seventy test functions have been chosen. Among these test functions, some are new while others are well known in the literature; some are unimodal, the others multi-modal; some are small in dimension (no. of variables, x in f(x)), while the others are large in dimension; some are algebraic polynomial equations, while the other are transcendental, etc. FORTRAN programs of DE and RPS have been appended. Among 70 functions, a few have been run for small as well as large dimensions. In total, 73 optimization exercises have been done. DE has succeeded in 63 cases while RPS has succeeded in 55 cases. In almost all cases, DE has converged faster and given much more accurate results. The convergence of RPS is much slower even for lesser stringency on accuracy. Some test functions have been hard for both the methods. These are: Zero-Sum (30D), Perm#1, Perm#2, Power and Bukin functions, Weierstrass, and Michalewicz functions. From what we find, one cannot reach at the definite conclusion that the DE performs better or worse than the RPS. None could assure a supremacy over the other. Each one faltered in some cases; each one succeeded in some others. However, DE is unquestionably faster, more accurate and more frequently successful than the RPS. It may be argued, nevertheless, that alternative choice of adjustable parameters could have yielded better results in either method’s case. The protagonists of either method could suggest that. Our purpose is not to join with the one or the other. We simply want to highlight that in certain cases they both succeed, in certain other case they both fail and each one has some selective preference over some particular type of surfaces. What is needed is to identify such structures and surfaces that suit a particular method most. It is needed that we find out some criteria to classify the problems that suit (or does not suit) a particular method. This classification will highlight the comparative advantages of using a particular method for dealing with a particular class of problems.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/1005/
File Format:
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 1005.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 05 Oct 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:1005

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).

Related research
Keywords: : Global optimization Stochastic search Repulsive particle swarm Differential Evolution Clustering algorithm Simulated annealing Genetic algorithm Tabu search Ant Colony algorithm Monte Carlo method Box algorithm Nelder-Mead Nonlinear programming FORTRAN computer program local optima Benchmark test functions

Find related papers by JEL classification:
C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods and Programming - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods and Programming - - - Computational Techniques

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
  1. Mishra, SK, 2006. "Globalization and Structural Changes in the Indian Industrial Sector: An Analysis of Production Functions," MPRA Paper 1231, University Library of Munich, Germany. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? There are over 16000 authors registered on RePEc Author Service.

This page was last updated on 2008-11-17.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.