Percentage of success in minimization of Rosenbrock function (2-D). A comparison of PSO and PSO-NM with varying probabilities of repositioning.
Open access peer-reviewed article
This Article is part of Numerical Analysis and Scientific Computing Section
Article metrics overview
3014 Article Downloads
Article Type: Research Paper
Date of acceptance: September 2022
Date of publication: October 2022
DoI: https://doi.org/10.5772/acrt.11
copyright: ©2022 The Author(s), Licensee IntechOpen, License: CC BY 4.0
Heuristic methods, for global optimization, have been receiving much interest in the last years, among which Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm can be highlighted. However, the application of heuristic methods can lead to premature convergence. In this work, the addition of a step on the PSO algorithm is proposed. This new step, based in Nelder–Mead simplex search method (NM), consists of repositioning the current particle with global best solution, not for a better position, but away from the current nearest local optimum, to avoid getting stuck on this local optimum. There are other PSO-NM algorithms, but the one we are proposing, has a different strategy. The proposed algorithm was also tested with the repositioning strategy in other particles beyond the current global best particle, depending on the repositioning probability. To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed methods, and study its better parameters, were used various test functions, and for each test function, various number of particles were used in combination with various probabilities of particles repositioning. A thousand runs were performed for each case, resulting in more than two millions runs. The computational studies showed that the repositioning of of global best particle increases the percentage of success on reaching the global best solution, but better results can be obtained applying the repositioning strategy to other particles with repositioning probabilities between 1–5%.
particle swarm optimization
Nelder–Mead simplex search
unconstrained optimization
hybrid optimization method
global optimum
Author information
Function minimization (or maximization) is extensively employed in various science fields. It refers to determination of the decision variables of a function, so that the function would be at its minimum (or maximum) value. A majority of problems, especially engineering ones, are optimization problems (function minimization or maximization) in which the decision variables should be determined in a way, that the systems will operate at their best operation points in relation to a specific objective [1]. Since most engineering and other science fields problems are non-linear, complicated and with various local optima, it is necessary to use methods with good ability of finding global optima. No method guarantees convergence to the global optimum, but recently a lot of heuristic methods have been proposed, and this class of methods present great potential in obtaining the global optimum.
The heuristic optimization methods are mostly inspired by nature as evolutionary, physical based, or based on animals or human behavior. The common characteristic among these models is that a global search is executed using movements of the search points, which is driven by a vector quantity given by its dynamic system, such as the distance to the best position already reached by all points [2]. The various methods include Simulated Annealing [3], Differential Evolution [4], Artificial Chemical Reaction Optimization Algorithm [5], Water Evaporation Optimization Algorithm [6], Lightning Search Algorithm [7], Lightning Attachment Procedure Optimization [1], Gravitational Search Algorithm [8], Black Hole Algorithm [9], Particle Swarm Optimization [10], Multi-Particle Collision Algorithm [11], Firefly Algorithm [12], Crow search algorithm [13], Whale Optimization Algorithm [14], Monkey Search Algorithm [15], Bat-inspired Algorithm [16], Artificial Bee Colony algorithm [17], Grey Wolf Optimization algorithm [18], Fruit Fly algorithm [19], Dragonfly algorithm [20], Social Spider Optimization [21], Cuckoo Optimization Algorithm [22], Lion Optimization Algorithm [23], Tabu Search [24, 25], League Championship Algorithm [26], Soccer League Competition Algorithm [27], Fireworks Algorithm [28], Colliding Bodies Optimization [29], Tug of War Optimization [30], Thermal Exchange Optimization [31], Ions Motion Algorithm [32], Pathfinder Algorithm [33], Black Widow Optimization Algorithm [34], Turbulent Flow of Water-based Optimization [35], and many others.
Immature convergence and stagnation at local minimum are some common deficiencies in the majority of heuristic optimization methods. Hence, researchers are often concerned to improve them through modifying previous optimizers, for example, modification on: Grey Wolf Optimization algorithm [36], Bat Algorithm [37], Particle Swarm Optimization [38–43], Firefly Algorithm [44], Fruit Fly Algorithm [45], Ant Colony Algorithm [46], Artificial Bee Colony [47–49], and so on.
It is difficult to predict the best algorithm for every optimization problem. However, a hybrid method of different optimization algorithms could be a potential solution and more efficient than using one single algorithm for solving complex problems [50]. Hybridization of heuristic algorithms with other heuristic or deterministic algorithms has been an active research area in recent years. For example, Particle Swarm Optimization and Simulated Annealing [51], Particle Swarm Optimization and Genetic Algorithm [52, 53], Particle Swarm Optimization and Support Vector Machines [54], Particle Swarm Optimization, Ant Colony Optimization and 3-Opt algorithms [55], Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm and Differential Evolution [56], Gravitational Search Algorithm and Genetic Algorithm [57], Extended Random Search and Conjugate Gradient Method [58], Scatter Search and Nelder–Mead [59], Genetic Algorithm and Newton Method [60], Simulated Annealing and Genetic Algorithm [61], Simulated Annealing and Tabu Search Algorithm [62], Particle Swarm Optimization, Spider Monkey Optimization and Ageist Spider Monkey Optimization algorithms [63], Whale Optimization Algorithm, Lévy Flight and Differential Evolution [64], Particle Swarm Optimization and Gravitational Search Algorithm [65], etc. Other hybrid methods are obtained by combining, in many ways, the Nelder–Mead simplex search (NM) and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), proposed respectively by Nelder and Mead [66] and Kennedy and Eberhart [10]. These methods are commonly called PSO-NM [67–72].
The focus in this work is to use a hybrid PSO-NM method for solving unconstrained optimization problems. The idea is to add a step in PSO algorithm where the particle with current global best value is repositioned, by a simplex methodology (the simplex is formed by the current global best and other particles) taking it away from the current nearest local minimum. This aims to avoid the global best particle from getting stuck in a local minimum, resulting in a premature convergence. This repositioning strategy is applied to another particles beyond the global best. The effectiveness of the proposed method is evaluated by computational studies comparing the rate of successful on reaching the global minimum for many test functions.
Over the past few decades, heuristic algorithms have been increasingly popular in dealing with challenging optimization problems in all kinds of engineering fields. This is because such techniques are more inexpensive and efficient than conventional numerical approaches. The merits of heuristics lie in many aspects. The first is their randomness, which can ensure success in avoiding local extrema and exploring the search space. The second is the black box concept, in which the input and output of considered problems are used without the need of gradient information. In addition, heuristic algorithms are easy to implement and their mathematical models are simple [73].
Heuristic methods have gained popularity. They are approximate non-deterministic optimization techniques that draw on specialized knowledge to address a particular issue. Then, from heuristics, meta-heuristic algorithms emerged. They trended and appeared as an attempt to acquire strategies for problem-independent decision making. Meta-heuristic algorithms are created to address a variety of optimization problems by directing the search process and trying to explore the search area fully. They have a greater level of abstraction than heuristics, allowing for the incorporation and management of many heuristics as well as the integration of methods for escaping from local optima to reach the global optimum [74]. The advantages and disadvantages of various meta-heuristic algorithms are mentioned in brief.
Evolutionary Programming (EP) is simple to implement and suitable for many problems, but there is an uncertainty on determining the best resolution. Differential Evolution (DE) does not become stuck in a local minimum but the tuning parameters need improvement. Genetic Algorithm (GA) has good coverage of initial solutions in the search space, but the convergence is slow [74]. Another advantage of GA over traditional optimization is its treatment of more practical, dynamic, and highly nonlinear problems.
Bio-inspired optimization (BIO) easily copes with failure and consequently, real-world engineering challenges. The BIO system always finds the best solution. However, broadening the range and development of bioinspired methods for analysing new areas of application is necessary to overcome one of its drawbacks, which is the lack of balance amongst its elements [74–76].
Jaya Algorithm is a human-based and can be used to solve numerous optimization challenges. However, Jaya algorithm might be stuck in local optima when trying to address complex optimization issues because of minimal population information in its only learning strategy [77].
Teaching learning-based optimization (TLBO) has the capacity to balances global search capability with convergence rate and the ability for local and global search, but the exploration process needs to be improved. Social evolution and learning optimization (SELO) is effective in finding global optimum solutions for unconstrained problems, however has a relatively slow convergence speed. Gravitational search algorithm (GSA) can explore the local solution and is simple to implement, nonetheless, has a poor convergence rate and high computational time [74]. Although GSA surpasses traditional PSO and GA approaches in many issues, there are still some shortcomings such as exploration–exploitation discrepancy and local convergence [78].
Water Cycle Algorithm (WCA) is an effective population based optimization algorithm, but the algorithm still resorts to premature convergence or gets stuck in local optima in attempting to solve problems and requires a substantial calculation time [78, 79]. An evaluation of several tests provides varying levels of complexity that confirm the effectiveness of the electromagnetism optimization (EMO) technique regarding accuracy, speed and consistency [21, 74]. Multiverse Optimizer Algorithm (MVO) requires less effort in computation, however the algorithm gets stuck in the local optimal solution [74]. Sine Cosine Algorithm (SCA) solves a large variety of optimization challenges, has the ability to look into diverse areas of a search space, avoiding local optima, converging towards global optimization and searching for promising regions on the search space [74, 80].
By combining the two phases (fusion and fission), Nuclear Reaction Optimization (NRO) maintains a balance between its exploration and exploitation abilities. The tests indicated that this optimization method is a potentially powerful and an efficient global optimization algorithm [74].
Among heuristic intelligent optimization algorithms, swarm heuristic intelligence optimization algorithms have been widely used to solve global optimization problems due to simplicity, flexibility, and high efficiency. By introducing randomness in the optimization process, swarm intelligence optimization algorithms can determine the global optimal solution accurately and reasonably, which makes the solution of swarm intelligence optimization algorithm have practical significance [81]. Among heuristic intelligence optimization, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) is one of the most widely used; it is a simple, easy to implement, effective but can get stuck on local minimum and is unsatisfactory in solving multi-objective optimization problems [74].
Although several novel metaheuristics and solvers have been published and made available, the need to develop robust and intelligent systems is the need of the hour. This can be achieved by combining the known advantages of conventional methods with novel strategies or designing hybrid algorithms [82].
The PSO-NM method proposed by Liu and Yang [70] uses the NM search method to improve the efficiency of PSO by increasing the convergence rate. This method, in each iteration, applies NM search method with a simplex composed by each particle and other
Fan
The PSO-NM hybrid approach proposed by Hsu and Gao [68] aims to improve both convergence rate and accuracy of the proposed optimization algorithm, using an enhanced NM method to improve
A PSO-NM method for crack detection in cantilever beams was proposed by Vakil Baghmisheh
The optimization techniques can be classified into two categories: deterministic (e.g., NM simplex search method, Steepest descent, Powell’s conjugate direction method, Rosenbrock method, etc.) and heuristic (e.g., PSO, simulated annealing algorithm, genetic algorithm, firefly algorithm, etc.). The advantage of deterministic methods is the lower computational time required, but for heuristic methods the probability of reaching the global minimum is greater. So the idea of this work is to propose an improvement of PSO method by using a repositioning methodology, of some particles, using the simplex approach proposed by Nelder and Mead [66], to avoid premature convergence provoked by the particles stuck in a local minimum, i. e., an hybridization strategy, to further increase the probability of global optimization success. The NM, PSO and PSO-NM (that we propose) methods are presented below.
The Particle Swarm Optimization algorithm is based on the movement of organisms in a bird flock or fish school motivated by social exchange of information. Birds and fish adjust their physical moment to avoid predator, seek food, mate, optimize environmental parameters as temperature, etc. Humans adjust not only physical movement but cognitive or experiential variable as well [10]. So, the idea of this method is to randomly generate a swarm of
The procedure of PSO algorithm, illustrated by the figure 1, is composed of the following steps:
A large number of consecutive iterations (5000) with no changes larger than 1 × 10−7 in the value of objective function evaluated for
All particles are very close to the
The idea of simplex method for function minimization of
In this method, initially,
If the function value of
If the function value at
If a point, obtained on reflection operation, with a function value of
The PSO method we propose has a different purpose from all PSO-NM methods presented before. Starting from the possibility of one particle, at the beginning of optimization process, gets closer to a local minimum, this can attract other particles to this local minimum, and lead the algorithm to converge to this value, in other words, a premature convergence. An attempt to avoid getting stuck in a local minimum, we propose in this work, is using the reflection of NM simplex search method for the particle with global best fitness ever reached. As illustrated in figure 3, this reflection, of current global best particle, is done through a center obtained by
But the repositioning of just one particle cannot be satisfactory, aiming to fix this, we propose that this repositioning operation by NM reflection can occur, depending on a probability of particles repositioning, in other particles beyond that with global best fitness. This additional of repositioning, can improve the ability of avoiding premature convergence, besides that can aid better exploration of the search domain. This procedures are done after the update of positions (step 6) of PSO algorithm, as shown in figure 4.
The numerical simulations were implemented through two codes in ForTran. In the first code the PSO method was implemented, as presented in subsection 3.1, to obtain the minimal function value, and the possibility to use any number of particles. The proposed PSO-NM heuristic optimization method was implemented, as presented in subsection 3.3, in a way that the user can choose the number of particles and the probability of particles repositioning.
For both methods, we used simultaneously two stopping criteria, the first one verifies if, for too many iterations (5000), the value change in the global best fitness is less than the tolerance (tol = 1 × 10−7), and the last one verifies if all particles are so close to current global best (a distance less than the tolerance, tol = 1 × 10−7). If at least one of these stopping criteria is reached, the optimization method terminated successfully.
To make the comparison of effectiveness between PSO and the proposed PSO-NM method, we used various test functions (presented in Appendix A, where most of them have various local minima), where for each test function, were used various numbers of particles (5, 7, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, 100, 200, 300 and 500) and, for the PSO-NM method, were applied various probabilities of particles repositioning (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 10%) beyond the current particle with best position in the search domain.
The optimization task for each case, on each test function, was performed 1000 times. After the convergence, the result obtained in each test was compared to the global optimum (the global optimum is known for all test functions used), so it was possible to evaluate the percentage of global optimization.
In order to evaluate the effect of the particles repositioning in the particles positions throughout the iterations, the function value mean (of all 1000 performed tests for each case) at global best position was calculated to make a comparison between the PSO and the proposed PSO-NM with various probabilities of particles repositioning. These tests were performed for various numbers of particles. Furthermore, for some simulations, the positions of all particles were stored to make a visual comparison between the methods.
In this section, we present the comparison of effectiveness between PSO and the proposed PSO-NM method. The rate of successful optimization, for all cases and test functions studied in this work, are presented in Appendix B.
Shown in figures 5, 6, 7 and 8 are the percentages of function minimization with respect to particle numbers, for Ackley’s function (2-D), Griewank function (2-D), Rastrigin function (3-D) and Rastrigin function (4-D), respectively. It can be seen in these figures, as expected, the larger number of particles, the greater the percentage of function minimization, but the particles repositioning presents benefits only for percentages up to 5%, percentages of repositioning greater than 5% leads to poor performance. The large amount of results presented in B makes this clearer, although this is not true for all test functions, in few cases 10% of particles repositioning probability it was obtained best results.
Figures 9, 10, 11 and 12 show the particle positions, in the search region, at some iterations for the PSO and proposed PSO-NM methods, for the Griewank function (2-D), with global minimum at
Figures 13 and 14 depicts the mean of Griewank function (2-D) value at global best position ever reached. Figure 13 shows the behavior for the first 200 iterations and figure 14 shows the behavior of mean function values until 5000 iterations. Initially, PSO method converges faster than PSO-NM, but analyzing the figure 13, it can be seen that the particles get stuck at a local minimum, and a higher probability of particles repositioning easily to escape from a local minimum. However, using 10% of particles repositioning presented some difficulty on the convergence process even after escaping from the local minimum. Again, it was clear that the proposed PSO-NM method presents advantages, but the percentage of particles repositioning should not be so high.
In this work we studied the effect of adding a step on PSO algorithm regarding to the percentage of success on reaching the global minimum of functions with several local minima. In this new step, the repositioning of the global best and other particles was performed, depending on a repositioning probability, which aims to avoid the global best particle getting stuck in a local minimum. Several simulations were carried out by computational studies, which demonstrated that this new step works very well. The repositioning of particle of global best solution increases the percentage of success on reaching the global best solution, but better results can be obtained applying the repositioning strategy to other particles with repositioning probabilities up to 5%. Repositioning probabilities greater than 5% should be avoided because, in various cases, this presented worse results. The strategy, which we proposed to avoid getting stuck on local optimum is very simple and can be easily adapted to other heuristic optimization methods.
The test functions employed in this work are given below:
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
Global optimum at
Function evaluated in the range
The percentage of success on obtaining the global minimum for all test functions employed in this work are given in Tables B.1–B.24.
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 39.9 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.0 | 95.7 | 67.7 | 18.6 |
7 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.5 | 90.1 | 40.8 |
10 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 98.5 | 66.9 |
15 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 90.0 |
20 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 96.3 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.1 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.5 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 92.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
7 | 99.6 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
10 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
15 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
20 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 85.4 | 99.7 | 99.6 | 99.4 | 99.2 | 99.4 | 99.2 | 97.3 | 89.6 |
7 | 98.5 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.6 | 100.0 | 99.7 | 99.4 | 97.5 |
10 | 99.6 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.4 |
15 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 |
20 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 5.6 | 9.1 | 15.6 | 24.3 | 23.9 | 22.6 | 19.0 |
7 | 0.3 | 2.0 | 5.7 | 14.0 | 22.1 | 36.1 | 42.5 | 55.1 | 53.3 |
10 | 0.8 | 1.9 | 7.5 | 15.4 | 27.2 | 41.7 | 55.7 | 66.0 | 77.8 |
15 | 1.7 | 2.6 | 8.7 | 18.5 | 27.2 | 42.4 | 56.8 | 78.0 | 87.5 |
20 | 1.4 | 3.2 | 12.0 | 20.2 | 31.5 | 44.4 | 61.2 | 80.4 | 91.7 |
30 | 2.3 | 3.2 | 20.4 | 28.8 | 39.1 | 52.6 | 64.8 | 84.2 | 94.7 |
40 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 26.9 | 36.8 | 48.4 | 58.9 | 71.9 | 88.3 | 94.8 |
50 | 2.8 | 4.2 | 31.4 | 43.6 | 58.7 | 69.1 | 76.3 | 89.1 | 97.0 |
100 | 4.7 | 6.0 | 49.5 | 66.4 | 79.2 | 88.1 | 94.4 | 98.4 | 99.6 |
200 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 70.2 | 85.8 | 95.1 | 98.2 | 99.2 | 99.9 | 100.0 |
300 | 6.5 | 7.0 | 84.0 | 95.2 | 97.9 | 99.8 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 9.4 | 7.8 | 94.0 | 98.6 | 99.6 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 31.2 | 57.8 | 78.9 | 87.3 | 92.0 | 93.4 | 93.3 | 93.7 | 94.2 |
7 | 33.5 | 65.9 | 84.0 | 86.8 | 93.5 | 96.9 | 96.7 | 97.1 | 98.4 |
10 | 51.8 | 70.4 | 92.7 | 94.6 | 96.4 | 97.4 | 99.1 | 99.1 | 99.5 |
15 | 64.3 | 76.5 | 98.3 | 98.7 | 99.1 | 99.3 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 100.0 |
20 | 77.6 | 85.7 | 99.7 | 99.8 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
30 | 89.3 | 94.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
40 | 94.9 | 96.1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
50 | 97.5 | 98.4 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 15.9 | 37.7 | 60.3 | 74.5 | 78.0 | 79.5 | 81.5 | 56.1 | 7.9 |
7 | 28.1 | 41.1 | 55.7 | 68.8 | 77.1 | 81.1 | 82.8 | 74.2 | 20.7 |
10 | 38.5 | 48.0 | 62.4 | 66.5 | 75.6 | 81.3 | 84.9 | 81.0 | 43.9 |
15 | 55.1 | 54.9 | 67.3 | 73.2 | 78.4 | 83.8 | 89.1 | 89.2 | 64.7 |
20 | 61.1 | 67.0 | 69.1 | 75.7 | 80.8 | 84.6 | 90.5 | 94.7 | 74.9 |
30 | 73.5 | 76.9 | 81.1 | 85.3 | 87.9 | 91.2 | 94.1 | 97.4 | 89.1 |
40 | 83.1 | 85.3 | 88.0 | 87.1 | 91.9 | 94.2 | 97.2 | 99.3 | 95.2 |
50 | 90.1 | 88.7 | 89.6 | 92.5 | 93.3 | 97.4 | 97.8 | 99.8 | 96.3 |
100 | 98.5 | 98.0 | 97.1 | 98.8 | 99.3 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 99.1 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 30.7 | 66.6 | 69.6 | 70.6 | 68.5 | 67.6 | 66.6 | 72.5 | 74.0 |
7 | 64.6 | 69.7 | 70.8 | 72.3 | 76.2 | 74.9 | 70.6 | 73.9 | 74.5 |
10 | 70.4 | 71.3 | 72.1 | 73.3 | 83.6 | 82.9 | 81.1 | 77.7 | 77.3 |
15 | 79.5 | 77.8 | 76.4 | 80.6 | 84.3 | 88.4 | 90.6 | 89.2 | 83.8 |
20 | 82.0 | 83.0 | 82.7 | 84.0 | 87.4 | 91.9 | 93.7 | 94.0 | 89.8 |
30 | 83.5 | 88.2 | 89.2 | 88.3 | 89.6 | 94.1 | 96.3 | 98.4 | 96.1 |
40 | 90.2 | 89.8 | 89.4 | 90.4 | 94.0 | 95.6 | 98.5 | 99.3 | 98.7 |
50 | 92.9 | 93.3 | 94.2 | 95.1 | 94.6 | 96.4 | 98.1 | 99.9 | 99.7 |
100 | 97.8 | 98.9 | 98.6 | 99.0 | 98.7 | 99.1 | 99.7 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 99.7 | 99.9 | 99.7 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 17.6 | 93.3 | 98.5 | 98.0 | 98.8 | 98.7 | 99.6 | 99.2 | 77.3 |
7 | 47.1 | 97.8 | 99.6 | 99.3 | 98.7 | 99.5 | 99.9 | 99.7 | 94.6 |
10 | 78.0 | 99.5 | 100.0 | 99.8 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 99.8 |
15 | 98.0 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.2 |
20 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.2 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 81.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.4 |
7 | 97.3 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 |
10 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
15 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 |
20 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 74.5 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 99.8 | 99.7 | 97.8 |
7 | 97.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
10 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
15 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.7 |
20 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 0.4 | 3.7 | 2.7 | 5.5 | 4.7 | 5.8 | 8.6 | 10.0 | 13.8 |
7 | 0.5 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 3.8 | 5.0 | 6.8 | 7.0 | 11.0 | 12.1 |
10 | 0.4 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 3.1 | 5.0 | 6.4 | 5.5 | 11.3 | 14.7 |
15 | 0.4 | 1.2 | 2.2 | 2.4 | 4.1 | 6.2 | 5.2 | 10.7 | 14.8 |
20 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 3.4 | 6.3 | 8.3 | 10.8 | 14.7 |
30 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 2.3 | 2.7 | 5.4 | 6.7 | 10.2 | 14.8 |
40 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 2.8 | 5.3 | 4.9 | 9.1 | 14.7 |
50 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.7 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 5.8 | 10.5 | 12.1 |
100 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 1.6 | 1.5 | 2.1 | 4.0 | 7.2 | 9.1 | 14.1 |
200 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 2.1 | 2.6 | 4.0 | 5.1 | 9.7 | 14.7 |
300 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 2.5 | 4.7 | 5.8 | 10.8 | 15.6 |
500 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 2.2 | 5.0 | 6.7 | 10.5 | 15.3 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 96.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
7 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
10 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
15 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
20 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 31.0 | 69.2 | 86.2 | 90.5 | 91.2 | 90.9 | 91.0 | 91.9 | 80.6 |
7 | 51.9 | 74.8 | 91.7 | 95.2 | 96.6 | 96.3 | 96.7 | 97.3 | 95.9 |
10 | 66.8 | 85.2 | 94.4 | 97.4 | 99.0 | 99.1 | 99.4 | 99.5 | 99.1 |
15 | 82.1 | 90.7 | 97.0 | 99.2 | 99.7 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.0 |
20 | 87.7 | 96.1 | 99.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 98.9 |
30 | 95.5 | 98.7 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.5 |
40 | 98.9 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
50 | 99.6 | 99.8 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 42.2 | 98.9 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 84.8 |
7 | 69.1 | 99.2 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 96.8 |
10 | 86.8 | 99.6 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.5 |
15 | 96.1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 |
20 | 98.3 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 3.9 | 61.7 | 70.1 | 80.1 | 83.0 | 81.1 | 81.3 | 78.9 | 77.0 |
7 | 8.9 | 59.0 | 71.4 | 80.6 | 85.4 | 90.9 | 88.6 | 88.7 | 85.7 |
10 | 21.3 | 64.3 | 68.6 | 80.0 | 86.4 | 93.0 | 94.5 | 93.3 | 92.6 |
15 | 38.0 | 65.2 | 76.2 | 82.6 | 86.3 | 92.1 | 95.9 | 97.2 | 99.9 |
20 | 54.7 | 70.0 | 79.0 | 82.6 | 87.3 | 93.4 | 95.9 | 97.3 | 96.3 |
30 | 64.9 | 77.2 | 82.7 | 86.6 | 90.3 | 94.6 | 97.0 | 99.5 | 97.2 |
40 | 73.8 | 80.3 | 88.3 | 91.2 | 93.2 | 96.7 | 97.9 | 99.7 | 99.2 |
50 | 89.0 | 84.4 | 88.5 | 92.5 | 93.7 | 97.0 | 97.8 | 99.9 | 99.6 |
100 | 89.0 | 92.5 | 96.1 | 97.4 | 98.9 | 99.3 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 95.6 | 96.5 | 98.9 | 99.7 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 97.5 | 98.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 99.2 | 99.8 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 5.8 | 8.3 | 20.5 | 48.8 | 58.4 | 64.8 | 67.8 | 69.4 | 44.0 |
7 | 10.0 | 9.3 | 22.4 | 49.7 | 70.9 | 77.0 | 81.4 | 85.2 | 83.6 |
10 | 16.6 | 14.4 | 29.3 | 48.9 | 74.0 | 85.6 | 90.8 | 93.6 | 97.5 |
15 | 24.8 | 20.2 | 38.1 | 52.4 | 77.0 | 89.9 | 97.0 | 98.3 | 99.6 |
20 | 29.8 | 27.3 | 47.7 | 61.9 | 81.3 | 94.5 | 97.5 | 99.3 | 100.0 |
30 | 45.5 | 36.5 | 58.6 | 78.1 | 91.3 | 97.0 | 99.5 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
40 | 52.2 | 43.9 | 74.5 | 90.2 | 96.7 | 98.9 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
50 | 62.2 | 52.5 | 85.2 | 94.7 | 98.2 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 82.6 | 77.3 | 97.4 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 97.2 | 96.4 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 99.9 | 99.4 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 5.9 | 92.0 | 99.2 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 99.3 | 84.9 | 14.2 |
7 | 25.2 | 91.3 | 99.6 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 96.9 | 39.5 |
10 | 50.4 | 95.8 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 | 72.9 |
15 | 75.4 | 97.3 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 |
20 | 83.9 | 97.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 98.8 |
30 | 94.5 | 98.7 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 |
40 | 97.2 | 99.5 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 |
50 | 98.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
100 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 0.0 | 13.1 | 16.5 | 19.7 | 20.8 | 20.7 | 15.3 | 13.7 | 10.8 |
7 | 0.4 | 11.3 | 17.4 | 20.9 | 25.8 | 26.0 | 20.3 | 23.1 | 19.2 |
10 | 1.2 | 11.4 | 14.9 | 22.7 | 29.2 | 34.7 | 32.9 | 29.9 | 27.5 |
15 | 3.4 | 15.7 | 20.2 | 26.9 | 33.7 | 44.1 | 42.5 | 38.4 | 39.6 |
20 | 11.1 | 14.5 | 21.6 | 27.8 | 38.5 | 45.6 | 49.4 | 50.7 | 49.4 |
30 | 16.3 | 22.9 | 28.7 | 33.5 | 43.7 | 49.2 | 56.3 | 61.0 | 58.1 |
40 | 25.5 | 31.5 | 32.4 | 37.6 | 46.0 | 53.6 | 60.3 | 66.7 | 67.8 |
50 | 30.9 | 34.0 | 39.3 | 45.3 | 49.2 | 59.6 | 64.8 | 76.2 | 74.3 |
100 | 50.3 | 54.2 | 59.0 | 60.4 | 64.6 | 72.4 | 80.5 | 88.2 | 91.0 |
200 | 67.4 | 71.2 | 70.0 | 77.6 | 80.3 | 85.3 | 90.5 | 97.8 | 99.1 |
300 | 77.9 | 79.9 | 83.2 | 87.1 | 89.8 | 93.6 | 95.8 | 99.2 | 99.4 |
500 | 87.0 | 89.9 | 92.9 | 93.9 | 96.0 | 98.0 | 98.1 | 99.9 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 1.0 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 3.2 | 4.4 | 7.5 | 6.7 | 3.9 | 0.0 |
7 | 1.4 | 2.0 | 2.5 | 4.3 | 12.9 | 27.6 | 40.3 | 45.7 | 17.3 |
10 | 2.4 | 2.8 | 3.6 | 6.0 | 13.5 | 25.8 | 49.7 | 67.2 | 59.1 |
15 | 4.7 | 3.8 | 6.3 | 5.9 | 14.8 | 27.4 | 46.4 | 78.7 | 89.2 |
20 | 6.2 | 4.7 | 7.4 | 11.7 | 20.6 | 33.3 | 50.4 | 84.1 | 95.0 |
30 | 8.3 | 5.9 | 10.8 | 21.4 | 27.2 | 43.6 | 60.8 | 91.1 | 98.9 |
40 | 9.7 | 8.1 | 14.7 | 27.7 | 39.7 | 55.3 | 70.4 | 93.6 | 99.6 |
50 | 17.4 | 8.2 | 19.4 | 32.9 | 47.6 | 64.7 | 78.4 | 95.8 | 99.9 |
100 | 26.7 | 16.2 | 41.3 | 62.5 | 78.6 | 91.4 | 96.2 | 99.7 | 100.0 |
200 | 45.3 | 31.4 | 71.8 | 87.5 | 98.2 | 99.6 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 59.1 | 46.4 | 86.1 | 97.6 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 76.7 | 65.2 | 96.6 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 1.4 | 92.5 | 83.1 | 63.3 | 26.5 | 1.9 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
7 | 93.0 | 96.6 | 92.6 | 83.3 | 53.5 | 14.1 | 1.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
10 | 99.0 | 98.2 | 97.1 | 90.7 | 75.5 | 38.4 | 8.5 | 0.1 | 0.0 |
15 | 99.7 | 99.5 | 98.9 | 97.3 | 91.8 | 66.1 | 32.1 | 1.3 | 0.0 |
20 | 99.8 | 99.9 | 99.4 | 98.6 | 96.3 | 85.7 | 56.3 | 3.2 | 0.0 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.2 | 95.0 | 80.0 | 11.6 | 0.2 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.7 | 99.6 | 98.7 | 91.7 | 25.2 | 0.2 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 99.6 | 93.9 | 41.5 | 0.3 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.5 | 85.6 | 6.2 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 98.4 | 27.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 56.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 83.6 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 0.1 | 99.4 | 98.3 | 93.2 | 56.2 | 4.8 | 1.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
7 | 85.2 | 99.8 | 98.8 | 97.2 | 83.5 | 31.6 | 3.8 | 0.2 | 0.0 |
10 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 99.4 | 97.8 | 93.6 | 68.6 | 19.1 | 1.0 | 0.1 |
15 | 99.7 | 99.9 | 99.8 | 98.8 | 98.0 | 90.2 | 57.8 | 2.7 | 0.1 |
20 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.8 | 99.4 | 99.3 | 96.1 | 82.0 | 9.2 | 0.8 |
30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 | 99.8 | 99.6 | 95.0 | 32.4 | 1.2 |
40 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 98.9 | 58.5 | 3.5 |
50 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.5 | 76.6 | 4.0 |
100 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.1 | 25.2 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 73.7 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 91.9 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.5 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
7 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 2.2 | 0.5 |
10 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 1.6 | 2.2 | 9.5 | 20.6 |
15 | 1.2 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 1.5 | 2.1 | 2.5 | 3.5 | 11.0 | 41.6 |
20 | 1.6 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 3.0 | 3.7 | 5.1 | 14.2 | 50.0 |
30 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 1.9 | 2.7 | 4.0 | 7.1 | 10.0 | 23.7 | 58.9 |
40 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 2.0 | 2.6 | 5.9 | 10.2 | 16.6 | 30.9 | 68.5 |
50 | 2.4 | 1.0 | 2.2 | 4.1 | 6.5 | 11.3 | 20.1 | 36.4 | 76.5 |
100 | 3.5 | 2.1 | 5.3 | 10.4 | 20.3 | 31.7 | 44.8 | 76.2 | 96.1 |
200 | 7.9 | 4.5 | 12.8 | 26.9 | 48.9 | 67.9 | 82.4 | 96.6 | 100.0 |
300 | 14.4 | 8.8 | 22.2 | 46.5 | 68.0 | 84.3 | 94.5 | 99.6 | 100.0 |
500 | 20.3 | 10.6 | 39.5 | 69.2 | 87.4 | 97.6 | 99.6 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 1.7 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.7 | 0.7 |
7 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 1.6 | 3.8 | 3.0 | 2.2 | 2.4 | 1.6 | 1.1 |
10 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 2.8 | 4.1 | 6.8 | 4.6 | 5.7 | 3.8 | 1.6 |
15 | 0.1 | 2.5 | 3.6 | 6.9 | 11.5 | 11.0 | 10.3 | 6.3 | 4.5 |
20 | 0.7 | 2.8 | 3.7 | 7.5 | 10.9 | 15.8 | 14.4 | 11.0 | 8.0 |
30 | 2.3 | 4.2 | 6.3 | 9.1 | 13.3 | 18.2 | 19.9 | 15.6 | 13.1 |
40 | 3.1 | 5.1 | 7.8 | 11.6 | 16.1 | 19.6 | 28.1 | 22.4 | 17.5 |
50 | 5.5 | 6.8 | 13.9 | 13.4 | 17.7 | 23.8 | 27.0 | 27.4 | 22.1 |
100 | 15.6 | 16.6 | 19.2 | 21.2 | 25.3 | 30.9 | 39.1 | 42.6 | 37.0 |
200 | 29.9 | 29.8 | 33.8 | 36.6 | 39.2 | 44.2 | 55.0 | 66.1 | 62.2 |
300 | 39.5 | 36.6 | 39.7 | 45.7 | 49.5 | 55.7 | 62.6 | 78.8 | 71.8 |
500 | 54.2 | 54.0 | 57.3 | 59.0 | 61.9 | 68.1 | 76.0 | 91.9 | 86.9 |
PSO | PSO-NM with probability of repositioning | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 7% | 10% | ||
5 | 0.3 | 78.5 | 97.8 | 98.9 | 98.2 | 96.2 | 89.0 | 35.3 | 0.5 |
7 | 7.0 | 86.3 | 98.8 | 99.9 | 99.9 | 99.5 | 97.8 | 74.7 | 3.4 |
10 | 21.9 | 90.7 | 99.4 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.8 | 95.1 | 14.3 |
15 | 40.8 | 93.3 | 99.7 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.4 | 45.4 |
20 | 55.9 | 94.2 | 99.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 73.7 |
30 | 71.7 | 94.1 | 99.7 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 92.7 |
40 | 84.4 | 96.2 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 97.4 |
50 | 91.8 | 97.3 | 99.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 98.9 |
100 | 98.7 | 99.7 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
200 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
300 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
500 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
The author would like to thank Marcel Joly for his comments, which helped in the construction of this method and improved the quality of this work.
Written by
Article Type: Research Paper
Date of acceptance: September 2022
Date of publication: October 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5772/acrt.11
Copyright: ©2022 The Author(s), Licensee IntechOpen, License: CC BY 4.0
© The Author(s) 2022. Licensee IntechOpen. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Article accomplishments
3014
Downloads
430
Views
0
Citations
0
Mentions
Join us today!
Submit your Article