Araştırma Makalesi

COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA

Cilt: 10 Sayı: 21 31 Aralık 2023
Yıldız Zoralioğlu , Sibel Arslan *
PDF İndir
Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi Kapak Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi
TR EN

COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA

Abstract

Nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithms are widely used because they achieve successful results in difficult optimization problems. Their popularity has led to the development of new metaheuristics for solving different engineering problems. New metaheuristics lead scientific research by providing faster and more efficient results. In this study, Artificial Rabbit Algorithm (ARO), Dwarf Mongoose Algorithm (DMO) and Genetic Algorithm (GA), which are recently developed metaheuristics, are compared. According to the literature review, the performances of these three algorithms are compared for the first time. Single and multi-modal standard quality test functions were used to evaluate the algorithms. The results of the algorithms were checked by t-test to see if there is a significant difference in terms of the functions used. According to the results obtained, it was observed that ARO produced more successful results than the other algorithms compared. This shows that the newly developed metaheuristics can be used in many engineering problems.

Keywords

Metaheuristic Algorithms , Artificial Rabbit Algorithm , Dwarf Mongoose Algorithm , Genetic Algorithm , Quality Test Functions

Kaynakça

  1. Yang XS. Nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithms. Luniver press 2010.
  2. Çelik Y, Yıldız İ, Karadeniz AT. Son Üç Yılda Geliştirilen Metasezgisel Algoritmalar Hakkında Kısa Bir İnceleme. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi 2019; 463-477.
  3. Wang L, Cao Q, Zhang Z, Mirjalili S, Zhao W. Artificial rabbits optimization: A new bio-inspired meta-heuristic algorithm for solving engineering optimization problems. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 2022; 114, 105082.
  4. Alorf A. A survey of recently developed metaheuristics and their comparative analysis. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 2023; 117, 105622.
  5. Cikan M, Kekezoglu B. Comparison of metaheuristic optimization techniques including Equilibrium optimizer algorithm in power distribution network reconfiguration. Alexandria Engineering Journal 2022; 61(2), 991-1031.
  6. Gupta S, Abderazek H, Yıldız BS, Yildiz AR, Mirjalili S, Sait SM. Comparison of metaheuristic optimization algorithms for solving constrained mechanical design optimization problems. Expert Systems with Applications 2021; 183, 115351.
  7. Panda KP, Panda G. Application of swarm optimisation‐based modified algorithm for selective harmonic elimination in reduced switch count multilevel inverter. IET Power Electronics 2018; 11(8), 1472-1482.
  8. Yiğit H, Ürgün S, Mirjalili S. Comparison of recent metaheuristic optimization algorithms to solve the SHE optimization problem in MLI. Neural Computing and Applications 2023; 35(10), 7369-7388.
  9. Altay O. Güncel Metasezgisel Yöntemlerin Standart Kalite Testi Fonksiyonlarında Karşılaştırılması. International Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences 2022; 8(2), 286-301
  10. Mirjalili S, Mirjalili S. Genetic algorithm. Evolutionary Algorithms and Neural Networks: Theory and Applications 2019; 43-55.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Dağıtılmış Sistemler ve Algoritmalar

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Yayımlanma Tarihi

31 Aralık 2023

Gönderilme Tarihi

16 Ağustos 2023

Kabul Tarihi

27 Aralık 2023

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2023 Cilt: 10 Sayı: 21

DOI

https://doi.org/10.54365/adyumbd.1344257

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA26JW99EL

Kaynak Göster

RIS / Bibtex
APA
Zoralioğlu, Y., & Arslan, S. (2023). COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(21), 266-275. https://doi.org/10.54365/adyumbd.1344257
AMA
1.Zoralioğlu Y, Arslan S. COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi. 2023;10(21):266-275. doi:10.54365/adyumbd.1344257
Chicago
Zoralioğlu, Yıldız, ve Sibel Arslan. 2023. “COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA”. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi 10 (21): 266-75. https://doi.org/10.54365/adyumbd.1344257.
EndNote
Zoralioğlu Y, Arslan S (01 Aralık 2023) COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi 10 21 266–275.
IEEE
[1]Y. Zoralioğlu ve S. Arslan, “COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA”, Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, c. 10, sy 21, ss. 266–275, Ara. 2023, doi: 10.54365/adyumbd.1344257.
ISNAD
Zoralioğlu, Yıldız - Arslan, Sibel. “COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA”. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi 10/21 (01 Aralık 2023): 266-275. https://doi.org/10.54365/adyumbd.1344257.
JAMA
1.Zoralioğlu Y, Arslan S. COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi. 2023;10:266–275.
MLA
Zoralioğlu, Yıldız, ve Sibel Arslan. “COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA”. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, c. 10, sy 21, Aralık 2023, ss. 266-75, doi:10.54365/adyumbd.1344257.
Vancouver
1.Yıldız Zoralioğlu, Sibel Arslan. COMPARISON OF METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS WITH DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi. 01 Aralık 2023;10(21):266-75. doi:10.54365/adyumbd.1344257