A new approach to particle swarm optimization algorithm

Particularly interesting group consists of algorithms that implement co-evolution or co-operation in natural environments, giving much more powerful implementations. The main aim is to obtain the algorithm which operation is not influenced by the environment. An unusual look at optimization algorithms made it possible to develop a new algorithm and its metaphors define for two groups of algorithms. These studies concern the particle swarm optimization algorithm as a model of predator and prey. New properties of the algorithm resulting from the co-operation mechanism that determines the operation of algorithm and significantly reduces environmental influence have been shown. Definitions of functions of behavior scenarios give new feature of the algorithm. This feature allows self controlling the optimization process. This approach can be successfully used in computer games. Properties of the new algorithm make it worth of interest, practical application and further research on its development. This study can be also an inspiration to search other solutions that implementing co-operation or co-evolution.Angeline, P. (1998). Using selection to improve particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, Anchorage (pp. 84–89).Arquilla, J., & Ronfeldt, D. (2000). Swarming and the future of conflict, RAND National Defense Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA, US.Bessaou, M., & Siarry, P. (2001). A genetic algorithm with real-value coding to optimize multimodal continuous functions. Structural and Multidiscipline Optimization, 23, 63–74.Bird, S., & Li, X. (2006). Adaptively choosing niching parameters in a PSO. In Proceedings of the 2006 genetic and evolutionary computation conference (pp. 3–10).Bird, S., & Li, X. (2007). Using regression to improve local convergence. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 592–599).Blackwell, T., & Bentley, P. (2002). Dont push me! Collision-avoiding swarms. In Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, Honolulu (pp. 1691–1696).Brits, R., Engelbrecht, F., & van den Bergh, A. P. (2002). Solving systems of unconstrained equations using particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE conference on systems, man, and cybernetics (pp. 102–107).Brits, R., Engelbrecht, A., & van den Bergh, F. (2002). A niching particle swarm optimizer. In Proceedings of the fourth asia-pacific conference on simulated evolution and learning (pp. 692–696).Chelouah, R., & Siarry, P. (2000). A continuous genetic algorithm designed for the global optimization of multimodal functions. Journal of Heuristics, 6(2), 191–213.Chelouah, R., & Siarry, P. (2000). Tabu search applied to global optimization. European Journal of Operational Research, 123, 256–270.Chelouah, R., & Siarry, P. (2003). Genetic and Nelder–Mead algorithms hybridized for a more accurate global optimization of continuous multiminima function. European Journal of Operational Research, 148(2), 335–348.Chelouah, R., & Siarry, P. (2005). A hybrid method combining continuous taboo search and Nelder–Mead simplex algorithms for the global optimization of multiminima functions. European Journal of Operational Research, 161, 636–654.Chen, T., & Chi, T. (2010). On the improvements of the particle swarm optimization algorithm. Advances in Engineering Software, 41(2), 229–239.Clerc, M., & Kennedy, J. (2002). The particle swarm-explosion, stability, and convergence in a multidimensional complex space. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(1), 58–73.Fan, H., & Shi, Y. (2001). Study on Vmax of particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the workshop particle swarm optimization, Indianapolis.Gao, H., & Xu, W. (2011). Particle swarm algorithm with hybrid mutation strategy. Applied Soft Computing, 11(8), 5129–5142.Gosciniak, I. (2008). Immune algorithm in non-stationary optimization task. In Proceedings of the 2008 international conference on computational intelligence for modelling control & automation, CIMCA ’08 (pp. 750–755). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society.He, Q., & Wang, L. (2007). An effective co-evolutionary particle swarm optimization for constrained engineering design problems. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 20(1), 89–99.Higashitani, M., Ishigame, A., & Yasuda, K., (2006). Particle swarm optimization considering the concept of predator–prey behavior. In 2006 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 434–437).Higashitani, M., Ishigame, A., & Yasuda, K. (2008). Pursuit-escape particle swarm optimization. IEEJ Transactions on Electrical and Electronic Engineering, 3(1), 136–142.Hu, X., & Eberhart, R. (2002). Multiobjective optimization using dynamic neighborhood particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the evolutionary computation on 2002. CEC ’02. Proceedings of the 2002 congress (Vol. 02, pp. 1677–1681). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society.Hu, X., Eberhart, R., & Shi, Y. (2003). Engineering optimization with particle swarm. In IEEE swarm intelligence symposium, SIS 2003 (pp. 53–57). Indianapolis: IEEE Neural Networks Society.Jang, W., Kang, H., Lee, B., Kim, K., Shin, D., & Kim, S. (2007). Optimized fuzzy clustering by predator prey particle swarm optimization. In IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, CEC2007 (pp. 3232–3238).Kennedy, J. (2000). Stereotyping: Improving particle swarm performance with cluster analysis. In Proceedings of the 2000 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 1507–1512).Kennedy, J., & Mendes, R. (2002). Population structure and particle swarm performance. In IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 1671–1676).Kuo, H., Chang, J., & Shyu, K. (2004). A hybrid algorithm of evolution and simplex methods applied to global optimization. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 12(4), 280–289.Leontitsis, A., Kontogiorgos, D., & Pange, J. (2006). Repel the swarm to the optimum. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 173(1), 265–272.Li, X. (2004). Adaptively choosing neighborhood bests using species in a particle swarm optimizer for multimodal function optimization. In Proceedings of the 2004 genetic and evolutionary computation conference (pp. 105–116).Li, C., & Yang, S. (2009). A clustering particle swarm optimizer for dynamic optimization. In Proceedings of the 2009 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 439–446).Liang, J., Suganthan, P., & Deb, K. (2005). Novel composition test functions for numerical global optimization. In Proceedings of the swarm intelligence symposium [Online]. Available: .Liang, J., Qin, A., Suganthan, P., & Baskar, S. (2006). Comprehensive learning particle swarm optimizer for global optimization of multimodal functions. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 10(3), 281–295.Lovbjerg, M., & Krink, T. (2002). Extending particle swarm optimizers with self-organized criticality. In Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary computation, Honolulu (pp. 1588–1593).Lung, R., & Dumitrescu, D. (2007). A collaborative model for tracking optima in dynamic environments. In Proceedings of the 2007 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 564–567).Mendes, R., Kennedy, J., & Neves, J. (2004). The fully informed particle swarm: simpler, maybe better. IEEE Transaction on Evolutionary Computation, 8(3), 204–210.Miranda, V., & Fonseca, N. (2002). New evolutionary particle swarm algorithm (EPSO) applied to voltage/VAR control. In Proceedings of the 14th power systems computation conference, Seville, Spain [Online] Available: .Parrott, D., & Li, X. (2004). A particle swarm model for tracking multiple peaks in a dynamic environment using speciation. In Proceedings of the 2004 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 98–103).Parrott, D., & Li, X. (2006). Locating and tracking multiple dynamic optima by a particle swarm model using speciation. In IEEE transaction on evolutionary computation (Vol. 10, pp. 440–458).Parsopoulos, K., & Vrahatis, M. (2004). UPSOA unified particle swarm optimization scheme. Lecture Series on Computational Sciences, 868–873.Passaroand, A., & Starita, A. (2008). Particle swarm optimization for multimodal functions: A clustering approach. Journal of Artificial Evolution and Applications, 2008, 15 (Article ID 482032).Peram, T., Veeramachaneni, K., & Mohan, C. (2003). Fitness-distance-ratio based particle swarm optimization. In Swarm intelligence symp. (pp. 174–181).Sedighizadeh, D., & Masehian, E. (2009). Particle swarm optimization methods, taxonomy and applications. International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering, 1(5), 1793–8201.Shi, Y., & Eberhart, R. (2001). Particle swarm optimization with fuzzy adaptive inertia weight. In Proceedings of the workshop particle swarm optimization, Indianapolis (pp. 101–106).Shi, Y., & Eberhart, R. (1998). A modified particle swarm optimizer. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation (pp. 69–73). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society.Thomsen, R. (2004). Multimodal optimization using crowding-based differential evolution. In Proceedings of the 2004 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 1382–1389).Trojanowski, K., & Wierzchoń, S. (2009). Immune-based algorithms for dynamic optimization. Information Sciences, 179(10), 1495–1515.Tsoulos, I., & Stavrakoudis, A. (2010). Enhancing PSO methods for global optimization. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 216(10), 2988–3001.van den Bergh, F., & Engelbrecht, A. (2004). A cooperative approach to particle swarm optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 8, 225–239.Wolpert, D., & Macready, W. (1997). No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Transaction on Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 67–82.Xie, X., Zhang, W., & Yang, Z. (2002). Dissipative particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 1456–1461).Yang, S., & Li, C. (2010). A clustering particle swarm optimizer for locating and tracking multiple optima in dynamic environments. In IEEE Trans. on evolutionary computation (Vol. 14, pp. 959–974).Kuo, H., Chang, J., & Liu, C. (2006). Particle swarm optimization for global optimization problems. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 14(3), 170–181

A survey of swarm intelligence for dynamic optimization: algorithms and applications

Swarm intelligence (SI) algorithms, including ant colony optimization, particle swarm optimization, bee-inspired algorithms, bacterial foraging optimization, firefly algorithms, fish swarm optimization and many more, have been proven to be good methods to address difficult optimization problems under stationary environments. Most SI algorithms have been developed to address stationary optimization problems and hence, they can converge on the (near-) optimum solution efficiently. However, many real-world problems have a dynamic environment that changes over time. For such dynamic optimization problems (DOPs), it is difficult for a conventional SI algorithm to track the changing optimum once the algorithm has converged on a solution. In the last two decades, there has been a growing interest of addressing DOPs using SI algorithms due to their adaptation capabilities. This paper presents a broad review on SI dynamic optimization (SIDO) focused on several classes of problems, such as discrete, continuous, constrained, multi-objective and classification problems, and real-world applications. In addition, this paper focuses on the enhancement strategies integrated in SI algorithms to address dynamic changes, the performance measurements and benchmark generators used in SIDO. Finally, some considerations about future directions in the subject are given

Feature selection using enhanced particle swarm optimisation for classification models.

In this research, we propose two Particle Swarm Optimisation (PSO) variants to undertake feature selection tasks. The aim is to overcome two major shortcomings of the original PSO model, i.e., premature convergence and weak exploitation around the near optimal solutions. The first proposed PSO variant incorporates four key operations, including a modified PSO operation with rectified personal and global best signals, spiral search based local exploitation, Gaussian distribution-based swarm leader enhancement, and mirroring and mutation operations for worst solution improvement. The second proposed PSO model enhances the first one through four new strategies, i.e., an adaptive exemplar breeding mechanism incorporating multiple optimal signals, nonlinear function oriented search coefficients, exponential and scattering schemes for swarm leader, and worst solution enhancement, respectively. In comparison with a set of 15 classical and advanced search methods, the proposed models illustrate statistical superiority for discriminative feature selection for a total of 13 data sets

Cooperative Particle Swarm Optimization for Combinatorial Problems

A particularly successful line of research for numerical optimization is the well-known computational paradigm particle swarm optimization (PSO). In the PSO framework, candidate solutions are represented as particles that have a position and a velocity in a multidimensional search space. The direct representation of a candidate solution as a point that flies through hyperspace (i.e., Rn) seems to strongly predispose the PSO toward continuous optimization. However, while some attempts have been made towards developing PSO algorithms for combinatorial problems, these techniques usually encode candidate solutions as permutations instead of points in search space and rely on additional local search algorithms. In this dissertation, I present extensions to PSO that by, incorporating a cooperative strategy, allow the PSO to solve combinatorial problems. The central hypothesis is that by allowing a set of particles, rather than one single particle, to represent a candidate solution, combinatorial problems can be solved by collectively constructing solutions. The cooperative strategy partitions the problem into components where each component is optimized by an individual particle. Particles move in continuous space and communicate through a feedback mechanism. This feedback mechanism guides them in the assessment of their individual contribution to the overall solution. Three new PSO-based algorithms are proposed. Shared-space CCPSO and multispace CCPSO provide two new cooperative strategies to split the combinatorial problem, and both models are tested on proven NP-hard problems. Multimodal CCPSO extends these combinatorial PSO algorithms to efficiently sample the search space in problems with multiple global optima. Shared-space CCPSO was evaluated on an abductive problem-solving task: the construction of parsimonious set of independent hypothesis in diagnostic problems with direct causal links between disorders and manifestations. Multi-space CCPSO was used to solve a protein structure prediction subproblem, sidechain packing. Both models are evaluated against the provable optimal solutions and results show that both proposed PSO algorithms are able to find optimal or near-optimal solutions. The exploratory ability of multimodal CCPSO is assessed by evaluating both the quality and diversity of the solutions obtained in a protein sequence design problem, a highly multimodal problem. These results provide evidence that extended PSO algorithms are capable of dealing with combinatorial problems without having to hybridize the PSO with other local search techniques or sacrifice the concept of particles moving throughout a continuous search space

Hybridizing Invasive Weed Optimization with Firefly Algorithm for Unconstrained and Constrained Optimization Problems

This study presents a hybrid invasive weed firefly optimization (HIWFO) algorithm for global optimization problems. Unconstrained and constrained optimization problems with continuous design variables are used to illustrate the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed algorithm. The firefly algorithm (FA is effective in local search, but can easily get trapped in local optima. The invasive weed optimization (IWO) algorithm, on the other hand, is effective in accurate global search, but not in local search. Therefore, the idea of hybridization between IWO and FA is to achieve a more robust optimization technique, especially to compensate for the deficiencies of the individual algorithms. In the proposed algorithm, the firefly method is embedded into IWO to enhance the local search capability of IWO algorithm that already has very good exploration capability. The performance of the proposed method is assessed with four well-known unconstrained problems and four practical constrained problems. Comparative assessments of performance of the proposed algorithm with the original FA and IWO are carried out on the unconstrained problems and with several other hybrid methods reported in the literature on the practical constrained problems, to illustrate its effectiveness. Simulation results show that the proposed HIWFO algorithm h as superior searching quality and robustness than the approaches considered