On the comparison of initialisation strategies in differential evolution for large scale optimisation

Differential Evolution (de) has shown to be a promising global optimisation solver for continuous problems, even for those with a large dimensionality. Different previous works have studied the effects that a population initialisation strategy has on the performance of de when solving large scale continuous problems, and several contradictions have appeared with respect to the benefits that a particular initialisation scheme might provide. Some works have claimed that by applying a particular approach to a given problem, the performance of de is going to be better than using others. In other cases however, researchers have stated that the overall performance of de is not going to be affected by the use of a particular initialisation method. In this work, we study a wide range of well-known initialisation techniques for de. Taking into account the best and worst results, statistically significant differences among considered initialisation strategies appeared. Thus, with the aim of increasing the probability of appearance of high-quality results and/or reducing the probability of appearance of low-quality ones, a suitable initialisation strategy, which depends on the large scale problem being solved, should be selected.

[1]  Xiaodong Li,et al.  Benchmark Functions for the CEC'2010 Special Session and Competition on Large-Scale , 2009 .

[2]  Ponnuthurai N. Suganthan,et al.  Recent advances in differential evolution - An updated survey , 2016, Swarm Evol. Comput..

[3]  I. Sloan.  Lattice Methods for Multiple Integration , 1994 .

[4]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  A Novel Diversity-Based Replacement Strategy for Evolutionary Algorithms , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.

[5]  Lenka Skanderová,et al.  Comparison of Pseudorandom Numbers Generators and Chaotic Numbers Generators used in Differential Evolution , 2014 .

[6]  Xiaodong Li,et al.  Initialization methods for large scale global optimization , 2013, 2013 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  Ching-Yuen Chan,et al.  An opposition-based chaotic GA/PSO hybrid algorithm and its application in circle detection , 2012, Comput. Math. Appl..

[8]  Archana Jagannatam,et al.  Mersenne Twister A Pseudo-Random Number Generator , 2007 .

[9]  Paul Bratley,et al.  Algorithm 659: Implementing Sobol's quasirandom sequence generator , 1988, TOMS.

[10]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  Improving the vector generation strategy of Differential Evolution for large-scale optimization , 2015, Inf. Sci..

[11]  Dan Simon,et al.  Mathematical and Experimental Analyses of Oppositional Algorithms , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.

[12]  Ponnuthurai N. Suganthan,et al.  Empirical investigations into the exponential crossover of differential evolutions , 2013, Swarm Evol. Comput..

[13]  C. Shunmuga Velayutham,et al.  Is Differential Evolution Sensitive to Pseudo Random Number Generator Quality? – An Investigation , 2016 .

[14]  Xiaodong Li,et al.  Differential evolution on the CEC-2013 single-objective continuous optimization testbed , 2013, 2013 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[15]  Li Zhao,et al.  A review of opposition-based learning from 2005 to 2012 , 2014, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell..

[16]  Gara Miranda,et al.  Metco: a Parallel Plugin-Based Framework for Multi-Objective Optimization , 2009, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools.

[17]  Rainer Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces , 1997, J. Glob. Optim..

[18]  Daryl Essam,et al.  Decomposition-based evolutionary algorithm for large scale constrained problems , 2015, Inf. Sci..

[19]  Xiaodong Li,et al.  Effects of population initialization on differential evolution for large scale optimization , 2014, 2014 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC).