Enhanced Differential Evolution With Adaptive Strategies for Numerical Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Differential evolution (DE) is a simple, yet efficient, evolutionary algorithm for global numerical optimization, which has been widely used in many areas. However, the choice of the best mutation strategy is difficult for a specific problem. To alleviate this drawback and enhance the performance of DE, in this paper, we present a family of improved DE that attempts to adaptively choose a more suitable strategy for a problem at hand. In addition, in our proposed strategy adaptation mechanism (SaM), different parameter adaptation methods of DE can be used for different strategies. In order to test the efficiency of our approach, we combine our proposed SaM with JADE, which is a recently proposed DE variant, for numerical optimization. Twenty widely used scalable benchmark problems are chosen from the literature as the test suit. Experimental results verify our expectation that the SaM is able to adaptively determine a more suitable strategy for a specific problem. Compared with other state-of-the-art DE variants, our approach performs better, or at least comparably, in terms of the quality of the final solutions and the convergence rate. Finally, we validate the powerful capability of our approach by solving two real-world optimization problems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".