Performance assessment and exhaustive listing of 500+ nature inspired metaheuristic algorithms

TL;DR

This paper exhaustively catalogs over 500 nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithms, compares recent variants on benchmark problems, and investigates their search biases and performance under transformations.

Contribution

It provides the first comprehensive listing of 500+ metaheuristics and evaluates 15 recent algorithms on standardized benchmarks, revealing insights into their performance and biases.

Findings

EBCM performs comparably to top established algorithms.

Most new algorithms are less effective than 2017 variants in convergence and search ability.

Transformations like shifting the global optimum affect algorithm performance.

Abstract

Metaheuristics are popularly used in various fields, and they have attracted much attention in the scientific and industrial communities. In recent years, the number of new metaheuristic names has been continuously growing. Generally, the inventors attribute the novelties of these new algorithms to inspirations from either biology, human behaviors, physics, or other phenomena. In addition, these new algorithms, compared against basic versions of other metaheuristics using classical benchmark problems without shift/rotation, show competitive performances. In this study, we exhaustively tabulate more than 500 metaheuristics. To comparatively evaluate the performance of the recent competitive variants and newly proposed metaheuristics, 11 newly proposed metaheuristics and 4 variants of established metaheuristics are comprehensively compared on the CEC2017 benchmark suite. In addition, whether these algorithms have a search bias to the center of the search space is investigated. The results show that the performance of the newly proposed EBCM (effective butterfly optimizer with covariance matrix adaptation) algorithm performs comparably to the 4 well performing variants of the established metaheuristics and possesses similar properties and behaviors, such as convergence, diversity, exploration and exploitation trade-offs, in many aspects. The performance of all 15 of the algorithms is likely to deteriorate due to certain transformations, while the 4 state-of-the-art metaheuristics are less affected by transformations such as the shifting of the global optimal point away from the center of the search space. It should be noted that, except EBCM, the other 10 new algorithms proposed mostly during 2019-2020 are inferior to the well performing 2017 variants of differential evolution and evolution strategy in terms of convergence speed and global search ability on CEC 2017 functions.