2012
DOI: 10.1007/s00707-012-0754-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A hybrid evolutionary graph-based multi-objective algorithm for layout optimization of truss structures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An interesting, partially related to our approach is the work carried out in [66], which focuses on a hybrid evolutionary graph-based multi-objective algorithm for the layout optimization of truss structures. The encoding of each candidate solution is composed of three matrices (the adjacency matrix of the simple graph model, the adjacency matrix corresponding to the weighted graph model and the coordinate matrix of nodes) along with two Boolean vectors (representing restricted nodes, which cannot be left out, and those movable ones, respectively).…”
Section: Evolutionary Computation In Graph Approaches: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An interesting, partially related to our approach is the work carried out in [66], which focuses on a hybrid evolutionary graph-based multi-objective algorithm for the layout optimization of truss structures. The encoding of each candidate solution is composed of three matrices (the adjacency matrix of the simple graph model, the adjacency matrix corresponding to the weighted graph model and the coordinate matrix of nodes) along with two Boolean vectors (representing restricted nodes, which cannot be left out, and those movable ones, respectively).…”
Section: Evolutionary Computation In Graph Approaches: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A variety of such metrics and methods have been proposed in literature [9][10][11]. Method used in this study is based on a set of three metrics, namely: Coverage, Spacing and Maximum Spread [11,12].…”
Section: Comparison Criteriamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Layout optimization has been investigated by different researchers using different methods. For example Wu and Chow [1] used GA for discrete variables for sections and continuous variables for nodal coordinates, Hasançebi and Erbatur [2] proposed an improved GA by combining the GA with annealing perturbation and adaptive design space reduction strategies, Kaveh and Khayatazad [3] developed the ray optimization, Kaveh and Laknejadi [4] presented a hybrid evolutionary graph based multi-objective algorithm, Kaveh and Zolghadr [5] suggested the democratic PSO, Kaveh et al [6] presented hybrid PSO and SSO algorithm, Kaveh and Ilchi Ghazaan [7] utilized improved ray optimization, Kaveh and Mahjoubi [8] proposed an improved spiral optimization algorithm for layout optimization of truss structures with frequency constraints, Kazemzadeh Azad et al [9] utilized big bang-big crunch for layout optimization of truss under dynamic excitation, and Kaveh et al [10] suggested a modified dolphin monitoring operator for layout optimization of planar braced frames.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%