IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v13y2025i11p1803-d1666616.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Overcoming Stagnation in Metaheuristic Algorithms with MsMA’s Adaptive Meta-Level Partitioning

Author

Listed:
  • Matej Črepinšek

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Koroška cesta 46, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia)

  • Marjan Mernik

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Koroška cesta 46, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia)

  • Miloš Beković

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Koroška cesta 46, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia)

  • Matej Pintarič

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Koroška cesta 46, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia)

  • Matej Moravec

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Koroška cesta 46, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia)

  • Miha Ravber

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Koroška cesta 46, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia)

Abstract

Stagnation remains a persistent challenge in optimization with metaheuristic algorithms (MAs), often leading to premature convergence and inefficient use of the remaining evaluation budget. This study introduces M s M A , a novel meta-level strategy that externally monitors MAs to detect stagnation and adaptively partitions computational resources. When stagnation occurs, M s M A divides the optimization run into partitions, restarting the MA for each partition with function evaluations guided by solution history, enhancing efficiency without modifying the MA’s internal logic, unlike algorithm-specific stagnation controls. The experimental results on the CEC’24 benchmark suite, which includes 29 diverse test functions, and on a real-world Load Flow Analysis (LFA) optimization problem demonstrate that MsMA consistently enhances the performance of all tested algorithms. In particular, Self-Adapting Differential Evolution (jDE), Manta Ray Foraging Optimization (MRFO), and the Coral Reefs Optimization Algorithm (CRO) showed significant improvements when paired with MsMA. Although MRFO originally performed poorly on the CEC’24 suite, it achieved the best performance on the LFA problem when used with MsMA. Additionally, the combination of MsMA with Long-Term Memory Assistance (LTMA), a lookup-based approach that eliminates redundant evaluations, resulted in further performance gains and highlighted the potential of layered meta-strategies. This meta-level strategy pairing provides a versatile foundation for the development of stagnation-aware optimization techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Matej Črepinšek & Marjan Mernik & Miloš Beković & Matej Pintarič & Matej Moravec & Miha Ravber, 2025. "Overcoming Stagnation in Metaheuristic Algorithms with MsMA’s Adaptive Meta-Level Partitioning," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-35, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:11:p:1803-:d:1666616
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/11/1803/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/11/1803/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark E. Glickman, 1999. "Parameter Estimation in Large Dynamic Paired Comparison Experiments," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 48(3), pages 377-394.
    2. Yuhong Liu & Liming Zheng & Bohan Cai, 2024. "Adaptive Differential Evolution with the Stagnation Termination Mechanism," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-26, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Baker, Rose D. & McHale, Ian G., 2014. "A dynamic paired comparisons model: Who is the greatest tennis player?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 236(2), pages 677-684.
    2. Roberto Macrì Demartino & Leonardo Egidi & Nicola Torelli, 2025. "Alternative ranking measures to predict international football results," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 1899-1917, April.
    3. Cristiano Varin & Manuela Cattelan & David Firth, 2016. "Statistical modelling of citation exchange between statistics journals," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 179(1), pages 1-63, January.
    4. Owen G. Ward & Jing Wu & Tian Zheng & Anna L. Smith & James P. Curley, 2022. "Network Hawkes process models for exploring latent hierarchy in social animal interactions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 71(5), pages 1402-1426, November.
    5. Kovalchik Stephanie Ann, 2016. "Searching for the GOAT of tennis win prediction," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 127-138, September.
    6. Blaž Krese & Erik Štrumbelj, 2021. "A Bayesian approach to time-varying latent strengths in pairwise comparisons," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-17, May.
    7. Diego Fernandez Slezak & Mariano Sigman & Guillermo A Cecchi, 2018. "An entropic barriers diffusion theory of decision-making in multiple alternative tasks," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-14, March.
    8. McHale, Ian & Morton, Alex, 2011. "A Bradley-Terry type model for forecasting tennis match results," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 619-630, April.
    9. Devlin Stephen & Treloar Thomas & Creagar Molly & Cassels Samuel, 2021. "An iterative Markov rating method," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 117-127, June.
    10. Murray Thomas A., 2017. "Ranking ultimate teams using a Bayesian score-augmented win-loss model," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 63-78, June.
    11. Collingwood, James A.P. & Wright, Michael & Brooks, Roger J, 2022. "Evaluating the effectiveness of different player rating systems in predicting the results of professional snooker matches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 296(3), pages 1025-1035.
    12. Rose D. Baker & Ian G. McHale, 2015. "Time varying ratings in association football: the all-time greatest team is.," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 178(2), pages 481-492, February.
    13. Angelini, Giovanni & Candila, Vincenzo & De Angelis, Luca, 2022. "Weighted Elo rating for tennis match predictions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(1), pages 120-132.
    14. Chan Victor, 2011. "Prediction Accuracy of Linear Models for Paired Comparisons in Sports," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 7(3), pages 1-35, July.
    15. Hua, Hsuan-Fu & Chang, Ching-Ju & Lin, Tse-Ching & Weng, Ruby Chiu-Hsing, 2024. "Rating players by Laplace’s approximation and dynamic modeling," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 1152-1165.
    16. Alexandra Grand & Regina Dittrich & Brian Francis, 2015. "Markov models of dependence in longitudinal paired comparisons: an application to course design," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 99(2), pages 237-257, April.
    17. Yuval Salant & Jörg L. Spenkuch, 2021. "Complexity and Choice," CESifo Working Paper Series 9239, CESifo.
    18. Irons David J. & Buckley Stephen & Paulden Tim, 2014. "Developing an improved tennis ranking system," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 109-118, June.
    19. Szczecinski Leszek, 2022. "G-Elo: generalization of the Elo algorithm by modeling the discretized margin of victory," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 1-14, March.
    20. Lasek, Jan & Gagolewski, Marek, 2021. "Interpretable sports team rating models based on the gradient descent algorithm," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 1061-1071.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:11:p:1803-:d:1666616. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.