Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Tek Modlu ve Çok Modlu Kıyaslama Fonksiyonlarını Kullanan Biyoloji Tabanlı Metasezgisel Optimizasyon Algoritmalarının Performans Karşılaştırması

Year 2023, Volume: 18 Issue: 1, 157 - 167, 29.03.2023
https://doi.org/10.55525/tjst.1214897

Abstract

Optimizasyon günümüzde hayatımızın hemen her alanında kullanılmakta ve hayatımızı kolaylaştırmaktadır. Optimizasyon genellikle klasik ve sezgisel optimizasyon teknikleri olarak incelenmektedir. Klasik optimizasyon yöntemleri gerçek dünya mühendislik problemlerinde etkili değildir. Bu yöntemler doğaları gereği matematiksel bir modele ihtiyaç duyarlar. Matematiksel modelin oluşturulamadığı yada oluşturulsa bile etkili bir zamanda çözüm üretilemeyeceği anlarda bu problemlerin çözümünde metasezgisel optimizasyon yöntemleri günümüzde sıklıkla kullanılmaya başlamıştır. Bu yöntemler tüm mühendislik problemlerinde etkili sonuçları doğaları gereği üretemezler. Bundan dolayı sürekli olarak yeni metasezgisel optimizasyon yöntemleri araştırılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada da son yıllarda geliştirilen ve etkili sonuçlar üreten beş adet algoritmanın başarımlarını karşılaştırmak amacıyla kalite test fonksiyonları kullanılmıştır. Bu fonksiyonlardan elde edilen sonuçlar bu çalışmada paylaşılmıştır. Yapay Sinek Kuşu Optimizasyon Algoritması’nın (YSA) diğer metasezgisel algoritmalardan daha iyi sonuçlar verdiği gözlemlenmiştir.

References

  • Murty KG. Optimization models for decision making: Volume. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA, 2003.
  • Baydogan C. Sentiment Analysis in Social Networks Using Social Spider Optimization Algorithm. Tehnički vjesnik 2021; 28(6): 1943-1951.
  • Winston WL. Operations research: applications and algorithms. Cengage Learning, USA, 2022.
  • Baydogan C, Alatas B. Metaheuristic ant lion and moth flame optimization-based novel approach for automatic detection of hate speech in online social networks. IEEE Access 2021; 9, 110047-110062.
  • Ehlers S. A procedure to optimize ship side structures for crashworthiness. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment 2010; 224(1): 1-11.
  • Zhao W, Wang L, Mirjalili S. Artificial hummingbird algorithm: A new bio-inspired optimizer with its engineering applications. Comput. Methods Appl Mech Eng 2022; 388, 114194.
  • Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A. Grey wolf optimizer. Adv Eng Software 2014; 69: 46-61.
  • Asghari K, Masdari M, Gharehchopogh, FS, Saneifard R. A chaotic and hybrid gray wolf-whale algorithm for solving continuous optimization problems. Prog Artif Intell 2021; 10(3): 349-374.
  • Şenel FA, Gökçe F, Yüksel AS, Yiğit T. A novel hybrid PSO–GWO algorithm for optimization problems. Eng Comput. 2019; 35(4): 1359-1373.
  • Mirjalili S, Lewis A. The whale optimization algorithm. Adv Eng Software 2016; 95: 51-67.
  • Gharehchopogh FS, Gholizadeh H. A comprehensive survey: Whale Optimization Algorithm and its applications. Swarm Evol Comput 2019; 48: 1-24.
  • Deepa R, Venkataraman R. Enhancing Whale Optimization Algorithm with Levy Flight for coverage optimization in wireless sensor networks. Computers & Electrical Engineering 2021; 94, 107359.
  • Kılıç H, Yüzgeç U. Improved antlion optimization algorithm via tournament selection and its application to parallel machine scheduling. Comput Ind Eng 2019; 132: 166-186.
  • Yue X, Zhang H. A novel industrial image contrast enhancement technique based on an improved ant lion optimizer. Arabian J Sci Eng 2021; 46(4): 3235-3246.
  • Acı Çİ, Gülcan H. A modified dragonfly optimization algorithm for single-and multiobjective problems using Brownian motion. Comput Intell Neurosci 2019; 2019, 6871298: 1-17.
  • Mirjalili S. Dragonfly algorithm: a new meta-heuristic optimization technique for solving single-objective, discrete, and multi-objective problems. Neural Comput Appl 2016; 27: 1053-1073.

Performance Comparison of Biology based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions

Year 2023, Volume: 18 Issue: 1, 157 - 167, 29.03.2023
https://doi.org/10.55525/tjst.1214897

Abstract

Optimization is used in almost every aspect of our lives today and makes our lives easier. Optimization is generally studied as classical and heuristic optimization techniques. Classical optimization methods are not effective in real-world engineering problems. These methods, by their nature, require a mathematical model. Metaheuristic optimization methods have started to be used frequently today in the solution of these problems when a mathematical model cannot be created or a solution cannot be produced in an effective time even if it is created. These methods, by their nature, cannot produce effective results in all engineering problems. Therefore, new metaheuristic optimization methods are constantly being researched. In this study, quality test functions have been used to compare the performances of five algorithms that have been developed in recent years and produce effective results. The results obtained from these functions are shared in this study. It has been observed that the Artificial Hummingbird Optimization Algorithm (AHA) gives better results than other metaheuristic algorithms.

References

  • Murty KG. Optimization models for decision making: Volume. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA, 2003.
  • Baydogan C. Sentiment Analysis in Social Networks Using Social Spider Optimization Algorithm. Tehnički vjesnik 2021; 28(6): 1943-1951.
  • Winston WL. Operations research: applications and algorithms. Cengage Learning, USA, 2022.
  • Baydogan C, Alatas B. Metaheuristic ant lion and moth flame optimization-based novel approach for automatic detection of hate speech in online social networks. IEEE Access 2021; 9, 110047-110062.
  • Ehlers S. A procedure to optimize ship side structures for crashworthiness. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment 2010; 224(1): 1-11.
  • Zhao W, Wang L, Mirjalili S. Artificial hummingbird algorithm: A new bio-inspired optimizer with its engineering applications. Comput. Methods Appl Mech Eng 2022; 388, 114194.
  • Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A. Grey wolf optimizer. Adv Eng Software 2014; 69: 46-61.
  • Asghari K, Masdari M, Gharehchopogh, FS, Saneifard R. A chaotic and hybrid gray wolf-whale algorithm for solving continuous optimization problems. Prog Artif Intell 2021; 10(3): 349-374.
  • Şenel FA, Gökçe F, Yüksel AS, Yiğit T. A novel hybrid PSO–GWO algorithm for optimization problems. Eng Comput. 2019; 35(4): 1359-1373.
  • Mirjalili S, Lewis A. The whale optimization algorithm. Adv Eng Software 2016; 95: 51-67.
  • Gharehchopogh FS, Gholizadeh H. A comprehensive survey: Whale Optimization Algorithm and its applications. Swarm Evol Comput 2019; 48: 1-24.
  • Deepa R, Venkataraman R. Enhancing Whale Optimization Algorithm with Levy Flight for coverage optimization in wireless sensor networks. Computers & Electrical Engineering 2021; 94, 107359.
  • Kılıç H, Yüzgeç U. Improved antlion optimization algorithm via tournament selection and its application to parallel machine scheduling. Comput Ind Eng 2019; 132: 166-186.
  • Yue X, Zhang H. A novel industrial image contrast enhancement technique based on an improved ant lion optimizer. Arabian J Sci Eng 2021; 46(4): 3235-3246.
  • Acı Çİ, Gülcan H. A modified dragonfly optimization algorithm for single-and multiobjective problems using Brownian motion. Comput Intell Neurosci 2019; 2019, 6871298: 1-17.
  • Mirjalili S. Dragonfly algorithm: a new meta-heuristic optimization technique for solving single-objective, discrete, and multi-objective problems. Neural Comput Appl 2016; 27: 1053-1073.
There are 16 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Engineering
Journal Section TJST
Authors

Fatma Belli This is me 0000-0002-4429-5256

Harun Bingöl 0000-0001-5071-4616

Publication Date March 29, 2023
Submission Date December 5, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2023 Volume: 18 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Belli, F., & Bingöl, H. (2023). Performance Comparison of Biology based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions. Turkish Journal of Science and Technology, 18(1), 157-167. https://doi.org/10.55525/tjst.1214897
AMA Belli F, Bingöl H. Performance Comparison of Biology based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions. TJST. March 2023;18(1):157-167. doi:10.55525/tjst.1214897
Chicago Belli, Fatma, and Harun Bingöl. “Performance Comparison of Biology Based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms Using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions”. Turkish Journal of Science and Technology 18, no. 1 (March 2023): 157-67. https://doi.org/10.55525/tjst.1214897.
EndNote Belli F, Bingöl H (March 1, 2023) Performance Comparison of Biology based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions. Turkish Journal of Science and Technology 18 1 157–167.
IEEE F. Belli and H. Bingöl, “Performance Comparison of Biology based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions”, TJST, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 157–167, 2023, doi: 10.55525/tjst.1214897.
ISNAD Belli, Fatma - Bingöl, Harun. “Performance Comparison of Biology Based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms Using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions”. Turkish Journal of Science and Technology 18/1 (March 2023), 157-167. https://doi.org/10.55525/tjst.1214897.
JAMA Belli F, Bingöl H. Performance Comparison of Biology based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions. TJST. 2023;18:157–167.
MLA Belli, Fatma and Harun Bingöl. “Performance Comparison of Biology Based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms Using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions”. Turkish Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 18, no. 1, 2023, pp. 157-6, doi:10.55525/tjst.1214897.
Vancouver Belli F, Bingöl H. Performance Comparison of Biology based Metaheuristics Optimization Algorithms using Unimodal and Multimodal Benchmark Functions. TJST. 2023;18(1):157-6.