Skip to main content
Log in

A framework for generating tunable test functions for multimodal optimization

  • Focus
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Multimodal function optimization, where the aim is to locate more than one solution, has attracted growing interest especially in the evolutionary computing research community. To evaluate experimentally the strengths and weaknesses of multimodal optimization algorithms, it is important to use test functions representing different characteristics and various levels of difficulty. The available selection of multimodal test problems is, however, rather limited and no general framework exists. This paper describes an attempt to construct a software framework which includes a variety of easily tunable test functions. The aim is to provide a general and easily expandable environment for testing different methods of multimodal optimization. Several function families with different characteristics are included. The framework implements new parameterizable function families for generating desired landscapes. Additionally the framework implements a selection of well known test functions from the literature, which can be rotated and stretched. The software module can easily be imported to any optimization algorithm implementation compatible with the C programming language. As an application example, 8 optimization approaches are compared by their ability to locate several global optima over a set of 16 functions with different properties generated by the proposed module. The effects of function regularity, dimensionality and number of local optima on the performance of different algorithms are studied.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beasley D, Bull D, Martin R (1993a) An overview of genetic algorithms: part 2, research topics. Univ Comput 15:170–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Beasley D, Bull D, Martin R (1993b) A sequential niche technique for multimodal function optimization. Evol Comput 1(2):101–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bezier P (1968) How renault uses numerical control for car body design and tooling. In: SAE Paper 680010, Society of Automotive Engineers Congress, Detroit, MI, USA.

  • Bezier P (1986) The mathematical basis of UNISURF CAD System. Butterworth-Heinemann, London. ISBN 978-0408221757

  • Branke J (2002) Evolutionary optimization in dynamic environments. Kluwer, Norwell

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Crutchley DA, Zwolinski M (2002) Using evolutionary and hybrid algorithms for DC operating point analysis of nonlinear circuits. In: Proceedings of 2002 IEEE world congress on computational intelligence, pp 753–758, Honolulu, USA, 12–15 May 2002. ISBN 0-7803-7282-4

  • De Jong K (1975) An analysis of the behavior of a class of genetic adaptive systems. PhD thesis, University of Michigan

  • Dong Z, Lu M, Lu Z, Wong K (2006) A differential evolution based method for power system planning. In: Proceedings of 2006 IEEE world congress on computational intelligence, pp 2699–2706, Vancouver, Canada, 16–21 July 2006. ISBN 0-7803-9489-5

  • Gallagher M, Yuan B (2006) A general-purpose tunable landscape generator. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 10:590–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaviano M, Kvasov D, Lera D, Sergeyev Y (2003) Algorithm 829: Software for generation of classes of test functions with known local and global minima for global optimization. ACM Trans Math Softw 29(4):469–480

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh A, Tsutsui S, Tanaka H, Corne D (2000) Genetic algorithms with substitution and re-entry of individuals. Int J Knowl Based Intell Eng Syst 4(1):64–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg D, Richardson J (1987) Genetic algorithms with sharing for multimodal function optimization. In: Grefenstette J (ed) Proceedins of the second international conference on genetic algorithms, pp 41–49

  • Hansen N, Ostermeier A (2001) Completely derandomized self adaptation in evolution strategies. Evol Comput 9(2):159–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harik G (1995) Finding multimodal solutions using restricted tournament selection. In: Eshelman L (eds) Proceedings of the sixth international conference on genetic algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, pp 24–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Li J, Balazs M, Parks G, Clarkson P (2002) A species conserving genetic algorithm for multimodal function optimization. Evol Comput 10(3):207–234 (ISSN 1063-6560)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li X (2005) Efficient differential evolution using speciation for multimodal function optimization. In: Proceedings of the conference on genetic and evolutionary computation (GECCO 2005). Washington DC, USA, pp 873–880

  • Liang J, Suganthan P, Deb K (2005) Novel composition test functions for numerical global optimization. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 68–75

  • Lobo F, Lima C (2006) On the utility of the multimodal problem generator for assessing the performance of evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of the ACM genetic and evolutionary computation conference (GECCO 2006), ACM Press

  • Macnish C (2007) Towards unbiased benchmarking of evolutionary and hybrid algorithms for real-valued optimisation. Connect Sci 19(4):361–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahfoud S (1994) Genetic drift in sharing methods. In: Profeedings of the First IEEE conference on evolutionary computation, pp 67–72

  • Mahfoud S (1995a) A comparison of parallel and sequential niching methods. In: Proceedings of 6th international conference on genetic algorithms, pp 136–143

  • Mahfoud S (1995b) Niching methods for genetic algorithms. PhD thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA

  • Michalewicz Z (1996) Genetic algorithms + data structures = evolution programs. Springer, Berlin

  • Michalewicz Z, Deb K, Schmidt M, Stidsen T (2000) Test-case generator for nonlinear continuous parameter optimization techniques. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 4:197–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison R (2004) Designing evolutionary algorithms for dynamic environments. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison R, De Jong K (1999) A test problem generator for nonstationary evironments. In: Proceedings of the congress of evolutionary computation. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 1843–1850

  • Pétrowski A (1996) A clearing procedure as a niching method for genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE international conference on evolutionary computation, pp 798–803

  • Press W, Flannery B, Teukolsky S, Vetterling W (1992) Numerical recipes in C, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ISBN 0-521-43108-5

  • Price K, Rönkkönen J (2006) Comparing the uni-modal scaling performance of global and local selection in mutation-only differential evolution algorithm. In: Proceedings of 2006 IEEE world congress on computational intelligence, Vancouver, Canada, pp 7387–7394, 16–21 July 2006. ISBN 0-7803-9489-5

  • Price K, Storn R, Lampinen J (2005) Differential evolution: a practical approach to global optimization. Springer, Berlin. ISBN 3-540-20950-6

  • Rönkkönen J, Lampinen J (2007a) An extended mutation concept for the local selection based differential evolution algorithm. In: Proceedings of genetic and evolutionary computation conference (GECCO 2007), London, England, pp 689–696. ISBN 978-1-59593-697-4

  • Rönkkönen J, Lampinen J (2007b) On determining multiple global optima by differential evolution. In: Evolutionary and deterministic methods for design, optimization and control, proceedings of eurogen 2007. Jyväskylä, Finland, pp 146–151. ISBN 978-84-96736-45-0

  • Rönkkönen J, Li X, Kyrki V (2009) The role of local and global search in solving problems with multiple global optima. Technical Report 110, Department of Information Technology, Lappeenranta University of Technology. ISBN 978-952-214-730-1

  • Salomon R (1996) Reevaluating genetic algorithms performance under coordinate rotation of benchmark functions. Biosystems 39:263–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shir O, Bäck T (2006) Niche radius adaptation in the cma-es niching algorithm. In: Parallel problem solving from nature (PPSN IX). Springer, Berlin, pp 142–151. ISBN 978-3-540-38990-3

  • Singh G, Deb K (2006) Comparison of multi-modal optimization algorithms based on evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference. ACM Press, Seattle, WA, pp 1305–1312

  • Storn R, Price K (1995) Differential evolution—a simple and efficient adaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces. Technical Report TR-95-012, International Computer Science Institute (ICSI)

  • Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution—a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Global Optim 11:341–359

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomsen R (2004) Multimodal optimization using crowding-based differential evolution. In: Proceedings of the 2004 congress on evolutionary computation, vol 2. Portland, pp 1382–1389

  • Törn A, Zilinskas A (1989) Global optimization, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin. ISBN 9783540508717

  • Ursem R (1999) Multinational evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of congress of evolutionary computation (CEC 1999), vol 3. IEEE Press

  • Weise T, Niemczyk S, Skubch H, Reichle R, Geihs K (2008) A tunable model for multi-objective, epistatic, rugged, and neutral fitness landscapes. In: Proceedings of the 10th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation. Atlanta, GA, USA, pp 795–802

  • Whitley D, Lunacek M, Sokolov A (2006) Comparing the niches of cma-es, chc and pattern search using diverse benchmarks. In: Parallel problem solving from nature (PPSN IX). Springer, pp 988–997. ISBN 978-3-540-38990-3

  • Whitley D, Mathias K, Rana S, Dzubera J (1996) Evaluating evolutionary algorithms. Artif Intell 85:245–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcoxon F (1945) Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics 1:80–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolpert D, Macready W (1995) No free lunch theorems for search. Technical report SFI-TR-95-02-010, The Santa Fe Institute

  • Wolpert D, Macready W (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 1(1):67–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors want to thank Harri Lattu and Jarmo Ilonen for their help with implementing the software, Jouni Sampo for mathematical consultation, and the anonymous reviewers for their useful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jani Rönkkönen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rönkkönen, J., Li, X., Kyrki, V. et al. A framework for generating tunable test functions for multimodal optimization. Soft Comput 15, 1689–1706 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-010-0611-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-010-0611-1

Keywords

Navigation