2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2008.02.039
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hybrid Nelder–Mead simplex search and particle swarm optimization for constrained engineering design problems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
82
1
2

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 308 publications
(85 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
82
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…One of the common constrained engineering problems is the minimization of the weight of a tension/compression spring [1,2,[4][5][6][7]. The spring to be designed for minimum weight subject to constraints on minimum deflection, shear stress, surge frequency, limits on the outside diameter, and on design variables.…”
Section: Experimental Resuls and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…One of the common constrained engineering problems is the minimization of the weight of a tension/compression spring [1,2,[4][5][6][7]. The spring to be designed for minimum weight subject to constraints on minimum deflection, shear stress, surge frequency, limits on the outside diameter, and on design variables.…”
Section: Experimental Resuls and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These meta-heuristics deploy stochastic techniques such as differential evolution (DE) [1,4], particle swarm optimization (PSO) [5,6] and harmony search (HS) [2,7]. Of particular interest is the recent HS approach.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also show the run-time behavior of ACO MV and CES MV by using RLDs. It is important to note that NM-PSO [Zahara and Kao, 2009] and PSOLVER [Kayhan et al, 2010] report infeasible solutions that violate the problems' constraints;Crepinsek et al [Crepinsek et al, 2012] pointed out that the authors of TLBO [Rao et al, 2011] used an incorrect formula for computing the number of objective function evaluations. Therefore, we did not include these three algorithms in our comparison.…”
Section: Application To Engineering Optimization Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As it can be seen from this table, SA-MFO obtained better results compared with the standard MFO. Table 8 compares the optimal solution obtained for pressure vessel problem by SA-MFO with hybrid particle swarm optimization (HPSO) [10], co-evolutionary particle swarm optimization using Gaussian distribution (CPSOGD) [27], GA based on using of dominance-based tour tournament selection (GA-TTS) [3], co-evolutionary differential evolution (CDE) [12], PSO [15], hybrid Nelder-mead simplex search and particle swarm optimization (NMPSO) [41], Gaussian quantum-behaved particle swarm optimization (GQPSO) [1], and MFO. As it can be observed, SA-PSO and ACO obtained the optimal solutions compared with the other algorithms.…”
Section: Comparison Using Engineering Design Problems Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%