Who is the Winner? 3D-FOA or PSO?

Answer: 3D-FOA


Average Efficiency Comparisons of 3D-FOA and PSO for 32 Nonlinear Functions

Although PSO can solve most of these optimization problems, it costs much time compared to 3D-FOA. In our extensive experiments, we find that FOA is more accurate than PSO, the average time it takes is only half of that of PSO. It is interesting to discover five functions (Schwefel, Goldstein, Shubert, Polynomial, and Sum of Sin functions) are deceptive in PSO technique. In other words, PSO is potentially prone to convergence in the wrong direction.

We used five different notebooks to run 20 trails for these functions. The RMSE of simulated function values and average time spent are shown in the table  below. It is obviously found that 3D-FOA can solve all these optimization problems and costs less time compared to the PSO. The average RMSE of all functions by 3D-FOA and PSO are 0.65, 30.5, respectively. And averaged time spent over 20 trials for these two algorithms are 0.61 second and 1.25 seconds respectively.

 

Merry Mid-Autumn Festival!
メリー中秋節！
敬祝中秋節快樂！

Give you a cake
あなたのケーキを与える
送你一個蛋糕

 

 

 

Jing Si Aphorism:

 

There is no need to learn many teachings.

If we can put one simple verse into practice,

we can awaken our ture nature of goodness.