A self-learning particle swarm optimizer for global optimization problems

Copyright @ 2011 IEEE. All Rights Reserved. This article was made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.Particle swarm optimization (PSO) has been shown as an effective tool for solving global optimization problems. So far, most PSO algorithms use a single learning pattern for all particles, which means that all particles in a swarm use the same strategy. This monotonic learning pattern may cause the lack of intelligence for a particular particle, which makes it unable to deal with different complex situations. This paper presents a novel algorithm, called self-learning particle swarm optimizer (SLPSO), for global optimization problems. In SLPSO, each particle has a set of four strategies to cope with different situations in the search space. The cooperation of the four strategies is implemented by an adaptive learning framework at the individual level, which can enable a particle to choose the optimal strategy according to its own local fitness landscape. The experimental study on a set of 45 test functions and two real-world problems show that SLPSO has a superior performance in comparison with several other peer algorithms.This work was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council of U.K. under Grants EP/E060722/1 and EP/E060722/2

Improved particle swarm optimization algorithm for multi-reservoir system operation

AbstractIn this paper, a hybrid improved particle swarm optimization (IPSO) algorithm is proposed for the optimization of hydroelectric power scheduling in multi-reservoir systems. The conventional particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is improved in two ways: (1) The linearly decreasing inertia weight coefficient (LDIWC) is replaced by a self-adaptive exponential inertia weight coefficient (SEIWC), which could make the PSO algorithm more balanceable and more effective in both global and local searches. (2) The crossover and mutation idea inspired by the genetic algorithm (GA) is imported into the particle updating method to enhance the diversity of populations. The potential ability of IPSO in nonlinear numerical function optimization was first tested with three classical benchmark functions. Then, a long-term multi-reservoir system operation model based on IPSO was designed and a case study was carried out in the Minjiang Basin in China, where there is a power system consisting of 26 hydroelectric power plants. The scheduling results of the IPSO algorithm were found to outperform PSO and to be comparable with the results of the dynamic programming successive approximation (DPSA) algorithm

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

Stochastic Fractal Based Multiobjective Fruit Fly Optimization

The fruit fly optimization algorithm (FOA) is a global optimization algorithm inspired by the foraging behavior of a fruit fly swarm. In this study, a novel stochastic fractal model based fruit fly optimization algorithm is proposed for multiobjective optimization. A food source generating method based on a stochastic fractal with an adaptive parameter updating strategy is introduced to improve the convergence performance of the fruit fly optimization algorithm. To deal with multiobjective optimization problems, the Pareto domination concept is integrated into the selection process of fruit fly optimization and a novel multiobjective fruit fly optimization algorithm is then developed. Similarly to most of other multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs), an external elitist archive is utilized to preserve the nondominated solutions found so far during the evolution, and a normalized nearest neighbor distance based density estimation strategy is adopted to keep the diversity of the external elitist archive. Eighteen benchmarks are used to test the performance of the stochastic fractal based multiobjective fruit fly optimization algorithm (SFMOFOA). Numerical results show that the SFMOFOA is able to well converge to the Pareto fronts of the test benchmarks with good distributions. Compared with four state-of-the-art methods, namely, the non-dominated sorting generic algorithm (NSGA-II), the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm (SPEA2), multi-objective particle swarm optimization (MOPSO), and multiobjective self-adaptive differential evolution (MOSADE), the proposed SFMOFOA has better or competitive multiobjective optimization performance

Stochastic Fractal Based Multiobjective Fruit Fly Optimization

The fruit fly optimization algorithm (FOA) is a global optimization algorithm inspired by the foraging behavior of a fruit fly swarm. In this study, a novel stochastic fractal model based fruit fly optimization algorithm is proposed for multiobjective optimization. A food source generating method based on a stochastic fractal with an adaptive parameter updating strategy is introduced to improve the convergence performance of the fruit fly optimization algorithm. To deal with multiobjective optimization problems, the Pareto domination concept is integrated into the selection process of fruit fly optimization and a novel multiobjective fruit fly optimization algorithm is then developed. Similarly to most of other multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs), an external elitist archive is utilized to preserve the nondominated solutions found so far during the evolution, and a normalized nearest neighbor distance based density estimation strategy is adopted to keep the diversity of the external elitist archive. Eighteen benchmarks are used to test the performance of the stochastic fractal based multiobjective fruit fly optimization algorithm (SFMOFOA). Numerical results show that the SFMOFOA is able to well converge to the Pareto fronts of the test benchmarks with good distributions. Compared with four state-of-the-art methods, namely, the non-dominated sorting generic algorithm (NSGA-II), the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm (SPEA2), multi-objective particle swarm optimization (MOPSO), and multiobjective self-adaptive differential evolution (MOSADE), the proposed SFMOFOA has better or competitive multiobjective optimization performance

Adaptive particle swarm optimization

An adaptive particle swarm optimization (APSO) that features better search efficiency than classical particle swarm optimization (PSO) is presented. More importantly, it can perform a global search over the entire search space with faster convergence speed. The APSO consists of two main steps. First, by evaluating the population distribution and particle fitness, a real-time evolutionary state estimation procedure is performed to identify one of the following four defined evolutionary states, including exploration, exploitation, convergence, and jumping out in each generation. It enables the automatic control of inertia weight, acceleration coefficients, and other algorithmic parameters at run time to improve the search efficiency and convergence speed. Then, an elitist learning strategy is performed when the evolutionary state is classified as convergence state. The strategy will act on the globally best particle to jump out of the likely local optima. The APSO has comprehensively been evaluated on 12 unimodal and multimodal benchmark functions. The effects of parameter adaptation and elitist learning will be studied. Results show that APSO substantially enhances the performance of the PSO paradigm in terms of convergence speed, global optimality, solution accuracy, and algorithm reliability. As APSO introduces two new parameters to the PSO paradigm only, it does not introduce an additional design or implementation complexity