4.7 Article

A hybrid particle swarm optimization with crisscross learning strategy

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.engappai.2021.104418

关键词

Crisscross learning; Stochastic example learning; Particle swarm optimization (PSO)

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [62072236]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a hybrid particle swarm optimization algorithm with crossover learning strategy and stochastic example learning strategy to address the balance between local exploitation and global exploration capabilities of PSO. Experimental results show that the algorithm exhibits competitive performance on multiple test suites and real-world problems.
As an efficient and simple optimization algorithm, particle swarm optimization (PSO) has been widely applied to solve various real optimization problems. However, avoiding premature convergence and balancing the global exploration and local exploitation capabilities of the PSO remains two crucial problems. To overcome these drawbacks of PSO, a hybrid particle swarm optimization with crisscross learning strategy (PSO-CL) algorithm is proposed in this paper. In PSO-CL, in order to well balance the global exploration and local exploitation capabilities of PSO, a search direction adjustment mechanism based on subpopulation division operation is proposed. Meantime, to avoid the premature convergence and enhance the global search ability, a crossover-based comprehensive learning strategy (CCL) is adopted. Additionally, a stochastic example learning strategy (SEL) is introduced, which can assist collective information to be spread among separate sub-swarms, improve the local exploitation ability of the algorithm. 15 classic benchmark functions, CEC2017 test suite and two real-world optimization problems are utilized to verify the promising performance of PSO-CL, experimental results and statistical analysis indicate that PSO-CL has competitive performance compared with state-of-the-art PSO variants.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据