The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Improving Metaheuristic Algorithms With Information Feedback Models
Abstract
In most metaheuristic algorithms, the updating process fails to make use of information available from individuals in previous iterations. If this useful information could be exploited fully and used in the later optimization process, the quality of the succeeding solutions would be improved significantly. This paper presents our method for reusing the valuable information available from previous individuals to guide later search. In our approach, previous useful information was fed back to the updating process. We proposed six information feedback models. In these models, individuals from previous iterations were selected in either a fixed or random manner. Their useful information was incorporated into the updating process. Accordingly, an individual at the current iteration was updated based on the basic algorithm plus some selected previous individuals by using a simple fitness weighting method. By incorporating six different information feedback models into ten metaheuristic algorithms, this approach provided a number of variants of the basic algorithms. We demonstrated experimentally that the variants outperformed the basic algorithms significantly on 14 standard test functions and 10 CEC 2011 real world problems, thereby, establishing the value of the information feedback models.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Kennedy, J., & Eberhart, R. (2002) · Proceedings of ICNN'95 - International Conference on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/icnn.1995.488968 · Cited by 58,192
Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning
(1989) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-0936 · Cited by 49,010
Optimization by Simulated Annealing
Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D., & Vecchi, M. P. (1983) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.220.4598.671 · Cited by 45,134
Storn, R., & Price, K. (1997) · Journal of Global Optimization · doi:10.1023/a:1008202821328 · Cited by 29,569
Particle swarm optimization: An overview
Poli, R., Kennedy, J., & Blackwell, T. (2007) · Swarm Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s11721-007-0002-0 · Cited by 21,101
Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning
Goldberg, D. E., & Robson, D. (1988) · Cited by 18,391
Goldberg, D. E., & Shakespeare, W. (2002) · Cited by 16,088
No free lunch theorems for optimization
Wolpert, D. H., & Macready, W. G. (1997) · IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation · doi:10.1109/4235.585893 · Cited by 14,237
Karaboga, D., & Basturk, B. (2007) · Journal of Global Optimization · doi:10.1007/s10898-007-9149-x · Cited by 7,651
(2007) · Handbook of Approximation Algorithms and Metaheuristics · doi:10.1201/9781420010749-33 · Cited by 6,607
Cited by
Rajwar, K., Deep, K., & Das, S. (2023) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-023-10470-y · Cited by 687
ConvUNeXt: An efficient convolution neural network for medical image segmentation
Han, Z., Jian, M., & Wang, G.-G. (2022) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2022.109512 · Cited by 348
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, G.-G., & Tan, Y.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics
- Published
- 2019-02
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 542-555
- ISSN
- 2168-2267 (ISSN-L)
- 2168-2275
- OpenAlex
- W2780124552
- Cited by
- 285
- References
- 72
- FWCI
- 13.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improving Metaheuristic Algorithms With Information Feedback Models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tcyb.2017.2780274
- The paper
- Wang, G.-G., & Tan, Y. (2019). Improving Metaheuristic Algorithms With Information Feedback Models. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics. https://doi.org/10.1109/tcyb.2017.2780274
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.