2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00500-017-2894-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An efficient hybrid algorithm based on Water Cycle and Moth-Flame Optimization algorithms for solving numerical and constrained engineering optimization problems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
63
0
3

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 176 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 69 publications
0
63
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…To indicate the excellent performance of the IMFO method, it has been compared with eight well-established and competitive methods. These compared methods were the basis MFO [30], opposition-based MFO method (OMFO) [33], hybrid water cycle-moth-flame optimization method (WCMFO) [34], brain storm optimization method (BSO) [40], comprehensive learning PSO (CLPSO) method [41], artificial bee colony (ABC) method [20], sine cosine algorithm (SCA) [42], and improved JAYA (IJAYA) method [26]. All the compared methods were independently conducted 30 times on each PV model.…”
Section: Results and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To indicate the excellent performance of the IMFO method, it has been compared with eight well-established and competitive methods. These compared methods were the basis MFO [30], opposition-based MFO method (OMFO) [33], hybrid water cycle-moth-flame optimization method (WCMFO) [34], brain storm optimization method (BSO) [40], comprehensive learning PSO (CLPSO) method [41], artificial bee colony (ABC) method [20], sine cosine algorithm (SCA) [42], and improved JAYA (IJAYA) method [26]. All the compared methods were independently conducted 30 times on each PV model.…”
Section: Results and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To demonstrate that IMFO can effectively escape the local optimum when solving multimodal problems, we further tested the performance of IMFO, MFO [30], OMFO [33], WCMFO [34], BSO [40], CLPSO [41], ABC [20], SCA [42], and IJAYA [26] on the CEC2017 benchmark suite [44]. Due to the space constraints, the 30 benchmark functions of CEC2017 were listed in Table A5 of the Appendix A.…”
Section: Discussion Of Imfomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…OF � sort(OM) (8) else (9) F � sort(M t− 1 , M t ) (10) OF � sort(M t-1 , M t ) (11) end if (12) for i � 1 : n (13) for j � 1 : d (14) update t (15) calculate D with respect to the corresponding flame (16) update M(i, j) using equation (15) with respect to the corresponding flame (17) end for (18) end for (19) update the position of the current optimal agent using Lévy-flight (20) F_lévy � Lévy(F) (21) OF_lévy � FitnessFunction(F_lévy) (22) using the Metropolis criterion for OF and OF_lévy (23) update the position best flame obtained so far (24) update flame number using equation 16 Since the range of indicators is not uniform after quanti cation, the quantized data is normalized, and the data of each index is uniformly compressed into the interval [0, 1], which is bene cial to speed up the training of the model and improve the learning outcomes. e formula is as follows: Fitness value obtained so far Mathematical Problems in Engineering…”
Section: Test Settingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has the advantages of less adjustment parameters, faster convergence, and simple implementation. Hence, it is often used in engineering optimization problems [15,16]. However, MFO also has some shortcomings in the process of optimization.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The idea behind the heuristic-based method, it can solve various problems regardless of the basic algorithm framework. Metaheuristic methods can be divided into three main categories as stated by Khalilpourazari and Khalilpourazary in 2019, [10]: evolutionary algorithms, swarm intelligence, and physical-based algorithms.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%