Journals / Electrica / 2022 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2

SCANM: A Novel Hybrid Metaheuristic Algorithm and its Comparative Performance Assessment

Journal
Electrica
Pages
143–159
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The non-parametric test further verified the better capability of the proposed SCANM algorithm for optimization problems.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This paper proposes a novel sine–cosine and Nelder–Mead (SCANM) algorithm which hybridizes the sine–cosine algorithm (SCA) and Nelder–Mead (NM) local search method.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The SCANM algorithm was firstly compared with the SCA algorithm through 23 well-known test functions.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The non-parametric test further verified the better capability of the proposed SCANM algorithm for optimization problems.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This paper proposes a novel sine–cosine and Nelder–Mead (SCANM) algorithm which hybridizes the sine–cosine algorithm (SCA) and Nelder–Mead (NM) local search method. The original version of SCA is prone to early convergence at the local minimum. The purpose of the SCANM algorithm is to overcome this issue. Thus, it aims to overcome this issue with the employment of the NM method. The SCANM algorithm was firstly compared with the SCA algorithm through 23 well-known test functions. The statistical assessment confirmed the better performance of the proposed algorithm. The comparative convergence profiles further demonstrated the significant performance improvement of the proposed SCANM algorithm. Besides, a non-parametric test was performed, and the results that showed the ability of the proposed approach were not by coincidence. A popular and well-performed metaheuristic algorithm known as grey wolf optimization was also used along with the recent and promising two other algorithms (Archimedes optimization and Harris hawks optimization) to comparatively demonstrate the performance of the SCANM algorithm against well-known classical benchmark functions and CEC 2017 test suite. The comparative assessment showed that the SCANM algorithm has promising performance for optimization problems. The non-parametric test further verified the better capability of the proposed SCANM algorithm for optimization problems.

🔖

Cite This Article

KAYRİ, M., İZCİ, D., İPEK, C., EKER, E. (2022). SCANM: A Novel Hybrid Metaheuristic Algorithm and its Comparative Performance Assessment. Electrica, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2, 143–159. https://ajindex.com/articles/499909

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. D. Izci, “An Enhanced Slime Mould Algorithm for Function optimization,” in 3rd International Congress on Human-Computer Interaction, Optimization and Robotic Applications (HORA), 2021, pp. 1–5. [CrossRef] 2. A. Dündar, D. Izci, S. Ekinci, and E. Eker, “A Novel Modified Lévy Flight Distribution Algorithm based on Nelder-Mead Method for Function Optimization,” DÜMF Mühendislik Derg., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 487–496, 2021. [CrossRef] 3. E. Eker, M. Kayri, S. Ekinci, and D. Izci, “A new fusion of ASO with SA algorithm and its applications to MLP training and DC motor speed control,” Arab. J. Sci. Eng., vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 3889–3911, 2021. [CrossRef] 4. R. M. Rizk-Allah, “Hybridizing sine cosine algorithm with multi-orthogonal search strategy for engineering design problems,” J. Comput. Des. Eng., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 249–273, 2018. [CrossRef] 5. D. Izci, S. Ekinci, M. Kayri, and E. Eker, “A novel improved arithmetic optimization algorithm for optimal design of PID controlled and Bode’s ideal transfer function based automobile cruise control system,” Evol. Syst., 2021. [CrossRef] 6. H. Nenavath, D. R. K. Jatoth, and D. S. Das, “A synergy of the sine-cosine algorithm and particle swarm optimizer for improved global optimization and object tracking,” Swarm Evol. Comput., vol. 43, pp. 1–30, 2018. [CrossRef] 7. D. H. Wolpert, and W. G. Macready, “No free lunch theorems for optimization,” IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 67–82, 1997. [CrossRef] 8. D. Izci, S. Ekinci, E. Eker, and M. Kayri, “Improved manta ray foraging optimization using opposition-based learning for optimization problems,” in International Congress on Human-Computer Interaction, Optimization and Robotic Applications (HORA), 2020, pp. 1–6. [CrossRef] 9. H. Nenavath, and R. K. Jatoth, “Hybridizing sine cosine algorithm with differential evolution for global optimization and object tracking,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 62, pp. 1019–1043, 2018. [CrossRef] 10. H. N. Fakhouri, A. Hudaib, and A. Sleit, “Hybrid particle swarm optimization with sine cosine algorithm and Nelder–mead simplex for solving engineering design problems,” Arab. J. Sci. Eng., vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 3091–3109, 2020. [CrossRef] 11. S. Mirjalili, “SCA: A Sine cosine Algorithm for solving optimization problems,” Knowl. Based Syst., vol. 96, pp. 120–133, 2016. [CrossRef] 12. J. Zhang, Y. Zhou, and Q. Luo, “An improved sine cosine water wave optimization algorithm for global optimization,” J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 34, n