IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Performance of Differential Evolution and Particle Swarm Methods on Some Relatively Harder Multi-modal Benchmark Functions

This paper aims at comparing the performance of the Differential Evolution (DE) and the Repulsive Particle Swarm (RPS) methods of global optimization. To this end, some relatively difficult test functions have been chosen. Among these test functions, some are new while others are well known in the literature. We use DE method with the exponential crossover scheme as well as with no crossover (only probabilistic replacement). Our findings suggest that DE (with the exponential crossover scheme) mostly fails to find the optimum in case of the functions under study. Of course, it succeeds in case of some functions (perm#2, zero-sum) for very small dimension, but begins to falter as soon as the dimension is increased. In case of DCS function, it works well up to dimension = 5. When we use no crossover (only probabilistic replacement) we obtain better results in case of several of the functions under study. In case of Perm#1, Perm#2, Zero-sum, Kowalik, Hougen and Power-sum functions, a remarkable advantage is there. Whether crossover or no crossover, DE falters when the optimand function has some element of randomness. This is indicated by the functions: Yao-Liu#7, Fletcher-Powell, and “New function#2”. DE has no problems in optimizing the “New function #1”. But the “New function #2” proves to be a hard nut. However, RPS performs much better for such stochastic functions. When the Fletcher-Powell function is optimized with non-stochastic c vector, DE works fine. But as soon as c is stochastic, it becomes unstable. Thus, it may be observed that an introduction of stochasticity into the decision variables (or simply added to the function as in Yao-Liu#7) interferes with the fundamentals of DE, which works through attainment of better and better (in the sense of Pareto improvement) population at each successive iteration. The paper concludes: (1) for different types of problems, different schemes of crossover (including none) may be suitable or unsuitable, (2) Stochasticity entering into the optimand function may make DE unstable, but RPS may function well.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. 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/449/1/MPRA_paper_449.pdf
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 449.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 13 Oct 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:449
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

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Mishra, SK, 2006. "Least Squares Fitting of Chacón-Gielis Curves by the Particle Swarm Method of Optimization," MPRA Paper 466, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  2. Mishra, SK, 2006. "Some Experiments on Fitting of Gielis Curves by Simulated Annealing and Particle Swarm Methods of Global Optimization," MPRA Paper 465, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  3. Mishra, Sudhanshu, 2006. "Some new test functions for global optimization and performance of repulsive particle swarm method," MPRA Paper 2718, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  4. Mishra, SK, 2006. "Repulsive Particle Swarm Method on Some Difficult Test Problems of Global Optimization," MPRA Paper 1742, University Library of Munich, Germany.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:449. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.