A New Optimization Algorithm Based on Search and Rescue Operations

[EN] In this paper, a new optimization algorithm called the search and rescue optimization algorithm (SAR) is proposed for solving single-objective continuous optimization problems. SAR is inspired by the explorations carried out by humans during search and rescue operations. The performance of SAR was evaluated on fifty-five optimization functions including a set of classic benchmark functions and a set of modern CEC 2013 benchmark functions from the literature. The obtained results were compared with twelve optimization algorithms including well-known optimization algorithms, recent variants of GA, DE, CMA-ES, and PSO, and recent metaheuristic algorithms. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for some of the comparisons, and the convergence behavior of SAR was investigated. The statistical results indicated SAR is highly competitive with the compared algorithms. Also, in order to evaluate the application of SAR on real-world optimization problems, it was applied to three engineering design problems, and the results revealed that SAR is able to find more accurate solutions with fewer function evaluations in comparison with the other existing algorithms. Thus, the proposed algorithm can be considered an efficient optimization method for real-world optimization problems.This study was partially supported by the Spanish Research Project (nos. TIN2016-80856-R and TIN2015-65515-C4-1-R).Shabani, A.; Asgarian, B.; Gharebaghi, SA.; Salido Gregorio, MA.; Giret Boggino, AS. (2019). A New Optimization Algorithm Based on Search and Rescue Operations. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. 2019:1-23. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/2482543S1232019Bianchi, L., Dorigo, M., Gambardella, L. M., & Gutjahr, W. J. (2008). A survey on metaheuristics for stochastic combinatorial optimization. Natural Computing, 8(2), 239-287. doi:10.1007/s11047-008-9098-4Holland, J. H. (1992). Genetic Algorithms. Scientific American, 267(1), 66-72. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0792-66Dorigo, M., Maniezzo, V., & Colorni, A. (1996). Ant system: optimization by a colony of cooperating agents. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics), 26(1), 29-41. doi:10.1109/3477.484436Manjarres, D., Landa-Torres, I., Gil-Lopez, S., Del Ser, J., Bilbao, M. N., Salcedo-Sanz, S., & Geem, Z. W. (2013). A survey on applications of the harmony search algorithm. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 26(8), 1818-1831. doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2013.05.008Karaboga, D., Gorkemli, B., Ozturk, C., & Karaboga, N. (2012). A comprehensive survey: artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm and applications. Artificial Intelligence Review, 42(1), 21-57. doi:10.1007/s10462-012-9328-0Rao, R. V., Savsani, V. J., & Vakharia, D. P. (2011). Teaching–learning-based optimization: A novel method for constrained mechanical design optimization problems. Computer-Aided Design, 43(3), 303-315. doi:10.1016/j.cad.2010.12.015Zhang, C., Lin, Q., Gao, L., & Li, X. (2015). Backtracking Search Algorithm with three constraint handling methods for constrained optimization problems. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(21), 7831-7845. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2015.05.050Yang, X. S. (2010). Firefly algorithm, stochastic test functions and design optimisation. International Journal of Bio-Inspired Computation, 2(2), 78. doi:10.1504/ijbic.2010.032124Punnathanam, V., & Kotecha, P. (2016). Yin-Yang-pair Optimization: A novel lightweight optimization algorithm. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 54, 62-79. doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2016.04.004Zhao, C., Wu, C., Chai, J., Wang, X., Yang, X., Lee, J.-M., & Kim, M. J. (2017). Decomposition-based multi-objective firefly algorithm for RFID network planning with uncertainty. Applied Soft Computing, 55, 549-564. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2017.02.009Zhao, C., Wu, C., Wang, X., Ling, B. W.-K., Teo, K. L., Lee, J.-M., & Jung, K.-H. (2017). Maximizing lifetime of a wireless sensor network via joint optimizing sink placement and sensor-to-sink routing. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 49, 319-337. doi:10.1016/j.apm.2017.05.001Wolpert, D. H., & Macready, W. G. (1997). No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 67-82. doi:10.1109/4235.585893Simon, D. (2008). Biogeography-Based Optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 12(6), 702-713. doi:10.1109/tevc.2008.919004Garg, H. (2015). An efficient biogeography based optimization algorithm for solving reliability optimization problems. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 24, 1-10. doi:10.1016/j.swevo.2015.05.001Storn, R., & Price, K. (1997). Journal of Global Optimization, 11(4), 341-359. doi:10.1023/a:1008202821328Das, S., Mullick, S. S., & Suganthan, P. N. (2016). Recent advances in differential evolution – An updated survey. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 27, 1-30. doi:10.1016/j.swevo.2016.01.004Couzin, I. D., Krause, J., Franks, N. R., & Levin, S. A. (2005). Effective leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move. Nature, 433(7025), 513-516. doi:10.1038/nature03236Gandomi, A. H., & Alavi, A. H. (2012). Krill herd: A new bio-inspired optimization algorithm. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 17(12), 4831-4845. doi:10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.05.010Mirjalili, S., Mirjalili, S. M., & Lewis, A. (2014). Grey Wolf Optimizer. Advances in Engineering Software, 69, 46-61. doi:10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007Erol, O. K., & Eksin, I. (2006). A new optimization method: Big Bang–Big Crunch. Advances in Engineering Software, 37(2), 106-111. doi:10.1016/j.advengsoft.2005.04.005Kaveh, A., & Mahdavi, V. R. (2014). Colliding bodies optimization: A novel meta-heuristic method. Computers & Structures, 139, 18-27. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2014.04.005Rashedi, E., Nezamabadi-pour, H., & Saryazdi, S. (2009). GSA: A Gravitational Search Algorithm. Information Sciences, 179(13), 2232-2248. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2009.03.004Zheng, Y.-J. (2015). Water wave optimization: A new nature-inspired metaheuristic. Computers & Operations Research, 55, 1-11. doi:10.1016/j.cor.2014.10.008Kaveh, A., & Khayatazad, M. (2012). A new meta-heuristic method: Ray Optimization. Computers & Structures, 112-113, 283-294. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2012.09.003Glover, F. (1989). Tabu Search—Part I. ORSA Journal on Computing, 1(3), 190-206. doi:10.1287/ijoc.1.3.190Chiang, H.-P., Chou, Y.-H., Chiu, C.-H., Kuo, S.-Y., & Huang, Y.-M. (2013). A quantum-inspired Tabu search algorithm for solving combinatorial optimization problems. Soft Computing, 18(9), 1771-1781. doi:10.1007/s00500-013-1203-7Mousavirad, S. J., & Ebrahimpour-Komleh, H. (2017). Human mental search: a new population-based metaheuristic optimization algorithm. Applied Intelligence, 47(3), 850-887. doi:10.1007/s10489-017-0903-6Karaboga, D., & Basturk, B. (2007). A powerful and efficient algorithm for numerical function optimization: artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm. Journal of Global Optimization, 39(3), 459-471. doi:10.1007/s10898-007-9149-xRao, R. V., Savsani, V. J., & Vakharia, D. P. (2012). Teaching–Learning-Based Optimization: An optimization method for continuous non-linear large scale problems. Information Sciences, 183(1), 1-15. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2011.08.006Digalakis, J. G., & Margaritis, K. G. (2001). On benchmarking functions for genetic algorithms. International Journal of Computer Mathematics, 77(4), 481-506. doi:10.1080/00207160108805080Karaboga, D., & Akay, B. (2009). A comparative study of Artificial Bee Colony algorithm. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 214(1), 108-132. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2009.03.090Lim, T. Y., Al-Betar, M. A., & Khader, A. T. (2015). Adaptive pair bonds in genetic algorithm: An application to real-parameter optimization. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 252, 503-519. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2014.12.030Fleury, C., & Braibant, V. (1986). Structural optimization: A new dual method using mixed variables. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 23(3), 409-428. doi:10.1002/nme.1620230307Derrac, J., García, S., Molina, D., & Herrera, F. (2011). A practical tutorial on the use of nonparametric statistical tests as a methodology for comparing evolutionary and swarm intelligence algorithms. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 3-18. doi:10.1016/j.swevo.2011.02.002Gandomi, A. H., Yang, X.-S., & Alavi, A. H. (2011). Cuckoo search algorithm: a metaheuristic approach to solve structural optimization problems. Engineering with Computers, 29(1), 17-35. doi:10.1007/s00366-011-0241-yWang, G. G. (2003). Adaptive Response Surface Method Using Inherited Latin Hypercube Design Points. Journal of Mechanical Design, 125(2), 210-220. doi:10.1115/1.1561044Cheng, M.-Y., & Prayogo, D. (2014). Symbiotic Organisms Search: A new metaheuristic optimization algorithm. Computers & Structures, 139, 98-112. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2014.03.007CHICKERMANE, H., & GEA, H. C. (1996). STRUCTURAL OPTIMIZATION USING A NEW LOCAL APPROXIMATION METHOD. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 39(5), 829-846. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0207(19960315)39:53.0.co;2-uChou, J.-S., & Ngo, N.-T. (2016). Modified firefly algorithm for multidimensional optimization in structural design problems. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 55(6), 2013-2028. doi:10.1007/s00158-016-1624-xSonmez, M. (2011). Artificial Bee Colony algorithm for optimization of truss structures. Applied Soft Computing, 11(2), 2406-2418. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2010.09.003Degertekin, S. O. (2012). Improved harmony search algorithms for sizing optimization of truss structures. Computers & Structures, 92-93, 229-241. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.10.022Degertekin, S. O., & Hayalioglu, M. S. (2013). Sizing truss structures using teaching-learning-based optimization. Computers & Structures, 119, 177-188. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2012.12.011Talatahari, S., Kheirollahi, M., Farahmandpour, C., & Gandomi, A. H. (2012). A multi-stage particle swarm for optimum design of truss structures. Neural Computing and Applications, 23(5), 1297-1309. doi:10.1007/s00521-012-1072-5Kaveh, A., Bakhshpoori, T., & Afshari, E. (2014). An efficient hybrid Particle Swarm and Swallow Swarm Optimization algorithm. Computers & Structures, 143, 40-59. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2014.07.012Kaveh, A., & Bakhshpoori, T. (2016). A new metaheuristic for continuous structural optimization: water evaporation optimization. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 54(1), 23-43. doi:10.1007/s00158-015-1396-8Jalili, S., & Hosseinzadeh, Y. (2015). A Cultural Algorithm for Optimal Design of Truss Structures. Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures, 12(9), 1721-1747. doi:10.1590/1679-7825154

A hybrid GA–PS–SQP method to solve power system valve-point economic dispatch problems

This study presents a new approach based on a hybrid algorithm consisting of Genetic Algorithm (GA), Pattern Search (PS) and Sequential Quadratic Programming (SQP) techniques to solve the well-known power system Economic dispatch problem (ED). GA is the main optimizer of the algorithm, whereas PS and SQP are used to fine tune the results of GA to increase confidence in the solution. For illustrative purposes, the algorithm has been applied to various test systems to assess its effectiveness. Furthermore, convergence characteristics and robustness of the proposed method have been explored through comparison with results reported in literature. The outcome is very encouraging and suggests that the hybrid GA–PS–SQP algorithm is very efficient in solving power system economic dispatch problem

Comparative Studies on Decentralized Multiloop PID Controller Design Using Evolutionary Algorithms

Decentralized PID controllers have been designed in this paper for simultaneous tracking of individual process variables in multivariable systems under step reference input. The controller design framework takes into account the minimization of a weighted sum of Integral of Time multiplied Squared Error (ITSE) and Integral of Squared Controller Output (ISCO) so as to balance the overall tracking errors for the process variables and required variation in the corresponding manipulated variables. Decentralized PID gains are tuned using three popular Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs) viz. Genetic Algorithm (GA), Evolutionary Strategy (ES) and Cultural Algorithm (CA). Credible simulation comparisons have been reported for four benchmark 2x2 multivariable processes.Comment: 6 pages, 9 figure