<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JILSA</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Intelligent Learning Systems and Applications</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2150-8402</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/jilsa.2012.41001</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">JILSA-17548</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Computer Science&amp;Communications</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Differential Evolution Using Opposite Point for Global Numerical Optimization
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>ouyun</surname><given-names>Ao</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hongqin</surname><given-names>Chi</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>College of Information, Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai, China.</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>School of Computer and Information, Anqing Teachers College, Anqing, China</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>youyun_ao@tom.com(OA)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>28</day><month>02</month><year>2012</year></pub-date><volume>04</volume><issue>01</issue><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>19</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>December</day>	<month>27th,</month>	<year>2010</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>May</day>	<month>12th,</month>	<year>2011</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>May</day>	<month>22nd,</month>	<year>2011</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  The Differential Evolution (DE) algorithm is arguably one of the most powerful stochastic optimization algorithms, which has been widely applied in various fields. Global numerical optimization is a very important and extremely dif-ficult task in optimization domain, and it is also a great need for many practical applications. This paper proposes an opposition-based DE algorithm for global numerical optimization, which is called GNO2DE. In GNO2DE, firstly, the opposite point method is employed to utilize the existing search space to improve the convergence speed. Secondly, two candidate DE strategies “DE/rand/1/bin” and “DE/current to best/2/bin” are randomly chosen to make the most of their respective advantages to enhance the search ability. In order to reduce the number of control parameters, this algorithm uses an adaptive crossover rate dynamically tuned during the evolutionary process. Finally, it is validated on a set of benchmark test functions for global numerical optimization. Compared with several existing algorithms, the performance of GNO2DE is superior to or not worse than that of these algorithms in terms of final accuracy, convergence speed, and robustness. In addition, we also especially compare the opposition-based DE algorithm with the DE algorithm without using the opposite point method, and the DE algorithm using “DE/rand/1/bin” or “DE/current to best/2/bin”, respectively.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Differential Evolution; Evolutionary Algorithm; Global Numerical Optimization; Stochastic Optimization</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Neural networks are widely used in the characterization of nonlinear systems [1-7], time-varying time-delay nonlinear systems [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref8">8</xref>] and they are applied in various applications [9-12].</p><p>The system may be with invariant parameters or timevarying parameters. The variation of some system may be such as; system with slow time-varying parametric uncertainties [13,14], with arbitrarily rapid time-varying parameters in a known compact set [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref15">15</xref>], with rapid timevarying parameters which converge asymptotically to constants [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref16">16</xref>], and with unknown parameters with arbitrarily fast and nonvanishing variations [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref17">17</xref>].</p><p>Using MLP architecture depends on various parameters, for instance the number of hidden layers, the number of neurons in each hidden layers, the activation function and the learning rate. These parameters present a difficulty to find the suitable architecture of the MLP.</p><p>A renewed interest in Radial Basis Function (RBF) neural network has been found in recent years in various application areas such as modeling and control [1-2], pattern recognition [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref18">18</xref>] identifying malfunctions of dynamical systems in the case of the frequency multiplier [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref19">19</xref>], and in the case of jump phenomenon [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref20">20</xref>], determining the optimal choice of machine tools [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref21">21</xref>], predicting 2D structure of proteins [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref22">22</xref>], classification [23, 24], solving systems of equations [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref25">25</xref>], analysis of the interaction of multi-input multi-output [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref26">26</xref>] and modeling of robots [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref27">27</xref>].</p><p>Using an RBF leads to a general model structure is less complex than that produced by an MLP network. The computational complexity induced by their learning is less than that induced by learning the MLP networks. The RBF network performance depends, to a choice of activation function [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref1">1</xref>], the number of hidden neurons and synaptic weights. By the time-varying nature of parameters the RBF methods are not applicable. However, the RBF is well used in invariant-system. The MLP is used in estimation of time-varying time-delay nonlinear system [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref17">17</xref>]. In this work, we investigate the possibility of extending the well conventional methods to model a nonlinear system in presence of time-varying parameters.</p><p>Several methods such as iterative methods [28-32] with the gradient descent method and evolutionary algorithms [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref32">32</xref>] that genetic algorithms are used in this paper to optimize the structure and determine the parameters of the RBF model. On the other hand, the gradient descent method is used to optimize the MLP network [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref33">33</xref>].</p><p>This paper focuses on the optimization of radial basis functions architecture, and compares it to the MLP architecture. The proposed algorithms are applied to timevarying nonlinear systems. The RBF using genetic algorithms gave the best results.</p><p>This paper is organized as follows. Nonlinear system modeling by MLP and RBF network is presented at the second and the third section. A comparative study between the MLP and RBF model, applied to two examples of nonlinear systems is presented in the forth section. Conclusions are given in the fifth section.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Nonlinear System Modeling by MLP</title><p>Modeling a nonlinear system from its input-output can be for several models. Among these models, the NARMA (Nonlinear Auto-Regressive Moving Average) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.17548-ref19">19</xref>] is used; its expression is given by the following equation:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66841"><label>(1)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\71e67105-2758-4236-98fd-795ed642ba24.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="2-9601054\1a01997b-1a5e-46cf-932e-0f400485aba4.jpg" /> is a nonlinear mapping, <img src="2-9601054\b647b77a-cec1-4a3d-9740-c066e8e1b5e5.jpg" />and <img src="2-9601054\d594df43-aff0-440d-ab20-46e53e6c2921.jpg" /> are the input and output vector, <img src="2-9601054\7bdcdfee-5d69-4fdb-96f7-4b6e74baf702.jpg" />and <img src="2-9601054\ec899f5a-5f15-4d8d-8459-bf893430d5cd.jpg" /> are the maximum input and output lags, respectively. In this paper, the coefficients of the model (1) depend on time.</p><p>The used MLP in this paper is to describe the nonlinear system (1). The objective of the modeling is to obtain an MLP that its output follows the output of the system.</p><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Structure of MLP</title><p>The multilayer perceptron network consists of an input layer, an output layer and usually one or more hidden layers. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> shows the architecture of MLP network employed for modeling a nonlinear system. It has an input layer of <img src="2-9601054\84899dfe-8fcb-4e4b-bb02-fcda74748457.jpg" /> neurons, <img src="2-9601054\4400b9b0-beb5-482f-a316-97f9f655a46d.jpg" />hidden layers, each hidden layer contains <img src="2-9601054\aa26f544-a1a5-48b9-835a-8a3c7884251b.jpg" /> neurons and one neuron in the only output layer. The sigmoid activation function, <img src="2-9601054\caae89ea-75c3-436f-9cc2-6962b3df38bd.jpg" />, is used.</p><p>For the nonlinear system (1), if no knowledge about the structure of the nonlinearity of the system is available such system is considered as a “black box” system modeling.</p><p>The output of MLP model <img src="2-9601054\339bd9f9-53c8-49a0-8ccb-4daae6cff34f.jpg" /> is given by the following equation:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66842"><label>(2)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\39293b7f-816f-47c1-8367-1404cb7bd31a.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="2-9601054\892e5e3a-ed0c-498f-a062-a0329b1e9baf.jpg" /> is a sigmoid activation function, <img src="2-9601054\aa4c38c2-32b8-4744-9c4f-231c1a7ca3e4.jpg" />is the output vector of MLP.<img src="2-9601054\1aa1caae-a356-4eeb-a668-6261bf9c6f10.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\0d4c77be-13b1-42d4-8561-50d31e68bd81.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\f65c2797-6f3a-451d-bc01-7935c1827f2b.jpg" />and <img src="2-9601054\683b08c4-0c3b-430c-94c2-30dc9a090117.jpg" /> are the synaptic weights of MLP. <img src="2-9601054\ca2fe202-170b-45be-be6b-f12b3c2ee825.jpg" />is the input vector of MLP.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Optimization of MLP</title><p>Among the optimization methods of MLP, the gradient descent method is used in this paper. Optimization of the MLP is to minimize the mean square error E.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66843"><label>(3)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\32f3faa8-5fe3-4d5c-a21a-69b803be0706.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="2-9601054\87395c84-cf97-4dea-805a-a8be68736137.jpg" /> is a function cost.</p><p>In this section, 2 hidden layers are taken into account with a single input layer and one output layer, the result of optimization is given by equations (4) to (10):</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66844"><label>(4)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\7cd4e442-5a0e-4f24-b6c5-c0ac90c0eb57.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66845"><label>(5)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\658a358a-d47c-491d-bc06-54b8e53ccb3b.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66846"><label>(6)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\e163ef26-930b-42da-b55d-6bba53d5778f.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>with:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66847"><label>(7)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\cc9bf769-6091-4c3a-af89-32f50649b21a.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66848"><label>(8)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\060ae220-a326-4d4f-99d4-6574e37cfa23.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66849"><label>(9)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\f16ea519-9e6f-4ba5-9cc7-3499f65a7ea3.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66850"><label>(10)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\8371aebd-cd11-4af3-9373-a05eccd98556.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Nonlinear System Modeling by RBF</title><p>As we did with the MLP model, the RBF is used to describe the nonlinear system (1).</p><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Structure of RBF</title><p>The RBF consists of only three layers; an input layer, an output layer and usually one hidden layers contains a hidden radial basis function. The RBF model calculates a linear combination of radial basis functions as is given by the following equation:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66851"><label>(11)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\2f57c0f4-5e41-4acb-adfc-38bdeba86fb3.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="2-9601054\2824d0fc-b75f-4069-bb42-74f5f4abef1d.jpg" /> is the output vector of RBF. <img src="2-9601054\65ca1c11-3138-4fa1-a5c0-2ee9abbda472.jpg" />is the synaptic weights of RBF and <img src="2-9601054\42b200d5-3489-4c5d-9055-78a3b6b6187b.jpg" /> is a Gaussian activation function:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66852"><label>(12)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\7f144db9-2f31-442b-97c3-2e4a6bb6dc2a.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Optimization Methods of RBF</title><p>Compared to the MLP, the RBF contains a very small number of parameters. The purpose of optimizing RBF is to determine<img src="2-9601054\881de3cd-2f8c-45c0-91e0-41207877ca73.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\97169e15-452a-45f9-891b-a99a45796394.jpg" />and <img src="2-9601054\cf8d808d-2d46-418b-a7f4-e19020f42478.jpg" /> by minimizing the function cost<img src="2-9601054\19651d36-151e-4b39-9644-d8e3b0c1d172.jpg" />.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66853"><label>(13)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\db360976-1cee-480f-b147-9dd235e0568a.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>In order to find the minimum of<img src="2-9601054\602eb1b2-4016-4ea7-a9f9-6f10b0211bda.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\e278ab28-472e-463a-b5e7-319793390dda.jpg" />and <img src="2-9601054\6d8e1c1c-2b62-4357-856a-5a69a7acfc79.jpg" /> two strategies are proposed in the literature for finding the minimum of<img src="2-9601054\9d327983-e35e-4ac7-8441-d0ba2c7c5e2c.jpg" />. The first is based on supervised methods or algorithms using direct time-consuming calculation to determine the minimum of<img src="2-9601054\14a69dca-ff77-4724-95df-4872fe09febf.jpg" />. The second adopts a hybrid scheme (less costly in computation time) to determine the minimum of<img src="2-9601054\fb5a0d00-f3ce-4af7-9095-947ac11a3c94.jpg" />. Solving these problems can be by various methods such as iterative methods (the Gradient Descent method) and evolutionary algorithms (Genetic Algorithm).</p><sec id="s3_2_1"><title>3.2.1. Optimization of RBF Using Gradient Descent</title><p>The principle of the GD method is applied to optimize the parameters of the RBF model. It uses the rules of delta:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66854"><label>(14)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\a4a25cad-fb1c-41e5-86e5-a0f511cc1dcf.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66855"><label>(15)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\4d5f96b3-7dd1-4b5e-a255-23b91a17278f.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66856"><label>(16)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\c4eb819f-6ddc-4e95-b276-3238e97e3e18.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Hence the calculation of partial derivatives introduced by the following equations:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66857"><label>(17)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\36661470-2559-4fc9-9fce-510240f3ea4b.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66858"><label>(18)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\0371974e-57a8-4289-b915-257feaf42e8e.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66859"><label>(19)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\e8e89267-4823-42e8-a65a-710f2e5b85e3.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>finally, we obtain</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66860"><label>(20)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\0df7ffa8-a0e0-47d2-b5f8-6c818b07ea4d.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66861"><label>(21)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\bab91dc1-d0cb-4bd9-992f-9b05dc31dcb1.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66862"><label>(22)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\954ddd96-f5e6-4f78-867e-6bd97398865d.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>The learning rate <img src="2-9601054\94e3b7d3-8230-4bd9-899c-c41eacaaff3a.jpg" /> satisfies the following condition:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66863"><label>(23)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\ce721dfe-16d3-4aaa-80aa-4163092ef2b5.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p><img src="2-9601054\509144dc-b5bc-48f7-a962-43f47a34248a.jpg" />is nonlinear in the parameters, which calls for finding the minimum, the use of an iterative algorithm that requires an arbitrary initialization of RBF network parameters and a suitable choice of<img src="2-9601054\c11cc0e4-d268-4039-a387-f02b9854fc13.jpg" />. To maximize the chances of finding the global minimum of<img src="2-9601054\f88894d3-0ce3-4c4f-b498-86acaa459829.jpg" />, several initialization parameters and therefore more training is needed, which increases the computing time.</p><p>Another method is to optimize separately the parameters of the hidden layer (the centers <img src="2-9601054\14898021-98d6-4802-9812-89620711a303.jpg" /> and the widths<img src="2-9601054\cd31b775-9f88-4028-af60-b7c3312fbd6b.jpg" />) by genetic algorithms and the synaptic weights between the hidden layer and output layer by the gradient descent method.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_2"><title>3.2.2. Optimization of RBF Using Genetic Algorithms</title><p>The genetic algorithm is an optimization algorithm based on techniques derived from genetics and natural evolution: crossover, mutation, selection. The GA is often used for optimization of RBF [34-38].</p><p>In this paper, the GA is used in order to optimize separately the parameters of the hidden layer (the centers <img src="2-9601054\2383528b-7020-4bed-a5a5-34111b2ccbf0.jpg" /> and the widths<img src="2-9601054\b72e8758-c52f-4fd7-a2f0-d6a6487ad3bd.jpg" />) of the RBF model.</p><p>To find suitable parameters, five elements of GA are called:</p><p>• A population is generated randomly. The population size is chosen to achieve a compromise between computation time and solution quality.</p><p>• The evaluation of each individual is performed by an evaluation function called fitness function. This function represents the only link between the physical problem and GA. In this paper, the used fitness function is given by the following equation.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66864"><label>(24)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\18f508f1-05bc-47ad-9e6b-b38ab62fe773.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>with <img src="2-9601054\5e5a2354-bfdf-436d-9960-2e0a8e9b89e4.jpg" /> and <img src="2-9601054\854e6302-5a42-41be-9672-883d54b6820d.jpg" /> are respectively the <img src="2-9601054\e838a389-4590-439d-b284-266434a1f7de.jpg" /> and the <img src="2-9601054\854d8642-5157-4930-b8a8-c557625283ba.jpg" /> which are used also in the following equation:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66865"><label>(25)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\845e21ec-5826-4f7d-be32-3126a922d8b0.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>• Once the evaluation of generation is realized, it makes a selection from the fitness function. In this paper, the tournament selection is used.</p><p>• The crossover operator is designed to enrich the diversity of the population by manipulating the genes of individuals existing in the population. In the other hand, the mutation operator involves the inversion of a bit in a chromosome. The mutation that mathematically guarantees the global optimum can be reached.</p><p>• The stopping criterion indicates that the solution is sufficiently approximate the optimum. In this paper, the maximum number of generations is chosen as stopping criterion.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> shows the organization of GA to find the minimal parameters of the hidden layer.</p><p>The obtained parameters (<img src="2-9601054\c4bff3d0-c395-4fef-87f4-ce78cf5d5260.jpg" />,<img src="2-9601054\b14daf36-03a6-4810-b80e-c80ce35c41b4.jpg" />) by GA are used also in the following equation:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66866"><label>(26)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\c774c078-c983-422b-80c9-d1188d7840f2.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>and the synaptic weights are calculated using the gradient descend method:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66867"><label>(27)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\5333e6b0-c008-4ddb-8b35-b868de004bee.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula></sec></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Comparative Study of Models</title><p>The effectiveness of the suggested methods applied to</p><p>the identification of behavior of two nonlinear timevarying systems are demonstrated by simulation experiments.</p><p>The performance of MLP and RBF models are evaluated by Normalized root Mean Square Error between the system output and the model output, denoted<img src="2-9601054\aebd0461-d6ff-41a3-b9a0-2cc179008a99.jpg" />.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66868"><label>(28)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\7b27dbe1-8fc0-4d04-a736-d3c47470b176.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>and</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66869"><label>(29)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\358c1461-520d-4e52-b201-4e8d9fe1dc1b.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><sec id="s4_1"><title>4.1. Nonlinear Time Varying-System</title><p>We consider the nonlinear time-varying system described by input-output model:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66870"><label>(30)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\eb3ddbaa-a9dd-481d-964a-8576d62068f4.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>with:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66871"><label>(31)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\ec83a635-0b5d-4939-b502-9b8138c833f1.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>The trajectory of <img src="2-9601054\a701fd03-a673-4e8f-869d-d96ef947256c.jpg" /> and <img src="2-9601054\bafc6ebe-3bd2-4da4-b041-7d3fc6187a5b.jpg" /> are given in figure 3.</p><p>The input <img src="2-9601054\546201c3-9f07-45ae-9a4a-474a9fb8700f.jpg" /> is sinusoidal signal and it is defined by the following equation:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66872"><label>(32)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\ad87869b-70a6-46e5-a35e-aa01bca611ac.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>In figure 4, the time-varying system responses, the MLP model and the optimized RBF model by the GD method are presented. In this simulation figure, the MLP parameters are<img src="2-9601054\9a444b30-be28-416a-9bc7-7931520e7552.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\c1134e1f-459d-4d26-99d9-159e25933196.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\1b0ae5b9-7137-415a-95d7-b14be37f5016.jpg" />and <img src="2-9601054\8008d0f1-bc5b-4a2d-b053-62d53c92800d.jpg" />. The obtained <img src="2-9601054\ba3baccf-ff03-481d-a4c3-4ca6e7ac86a8.jpg" /> is<img src="2-9601054\60a198d8-ec81-4333-85ec-4c5a9f625f40.jpg" />. However, the RBF parameters are<img src="2-9601054\e576dff5-5714-47be-9ee8-01dcef2eeb94.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\85c68281-91cb-4217-ae84-71dca6d76d14.jpg" />and<img src="2-9601054\c162acc0-4560-40fc-a25d-9ea5510a7797.jpg" />. The obtained <img src="2-9601054\c10e7a53-93ed-4c80-8b96-6849fcd35563.jpg" /> is <img src="2-9601054\c6440b8a-3d9b-476f-83aa-f8943deb281a.jpg" />.</p><p>In figure 5, the time-varying system responses, the MLP model and the optimized RBF model by GA are illustrated. In this simulation the same MLP parameters are taken, while the RBF parameters are<img src="2-9601054\7b2f8876-2f3f-40c8-bb29-65a26bbc4be0.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\a3afc19f-9225-44f4-8b33-ca54b1b57971.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\fee7c301-36d2-4906-ba0b-7480221255e2.jpg" />and<img src="2-9601054\8a64e35c-a403-42fd-ac2f-7b7e9ff64dc4.jpg" />. The obtained <img src="2-9601054\9de17e63-a213-426b-8ed4-70e4e3c11971.jpg" /> is<img src="2-9601054\245fb899-2608-43e3-833f-30f434dccc15.jpg" />.</p><p>In these two figures (4 and 5), it is clear that the responses of MLP and RBF models follow the system response although the variation of parameters.</p><p>In one hand, the obtained MLP model is found by several tests of parameters and of learning. The large number of MLP parameter increases the difficulty of its use. However, the simplicity of RBF makes modeling is simple and takes much less training time.</p><p>In figure 4, the optimized RBF model by the gradient descent method depends on an expensive time of training and depends on different learning rate (<img src="2-9601054\11f73921-1f91-4496-9f9c-a59b32f29c9b.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\50138710-1dad-4b66-8b3a-e658a25eafda.jpg" /> and<img src="2-9601054\15d3b2bb-ffee-407d-a214-61494a521687.jpg" />) while, in figure 5, the parameter of RBF model (<img src="2-9601054\e041ef6d-19ca-432f-abe5-eed8efa7a7eb.jpg" />and<img src="2-9601054\e0244181-5712-454d-a162-b3134d5a0f24.jpg" />) are finding separately by the GA and the synaptic weights (<img src="2-9601054\8942dae5-4758-4785-8045-7ef32efb8d6d.jpg" />) by the DG method, hence the model is faster than the previous.</p><sec id="s4_1_1"><title>Noise Effect of Time-Varying Nonlinear System</title><p>To validate the quality of the proposed algorithm, an added white noise is used. The influence of the noise of modeling, the Signal Noise Ratio (SNR) is used. The figures 6(a)-(c) present the <img src="2-9601054\a49134a1-9b8b-433f-93be-6a1a30879d05.jpg" /> evolution of different SNR for the both models.&#160;&#160;</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66873"><label>(33)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\37759c70-3b40-489a-8a66-f5dddc77a3ea.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="2-9601054\fbcfb956-cc5b-4d1d-bfc3-77e8842488a3.jpg" /> and <img src="2-9601054\53e853b6-d5cb-4a1c-a9c9-21e05abcf797.jpg" /> are respectively the output average value and noise average value.</p><p>In these three figures 6(a)-(c), we remark firstly the error goes down when the SNR value goes high, then the lowest MSE is obtained when the GA is used (figure 6(c)). Finally, in these all figures we see that the responses of MLP and RBF models follow the time-varying system response despite of the variation of parameters and an added noise.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4_2"><title>4.2. Chemical Reactor</title><p>To test the effectiveness of the MLP and RBF models we test them on a Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor, CSTR, which is a type of slowly time-varying nonlinear system used for the conduct of the chemical reactions [39-41]. However, the input-output are used in discrete time. A diagram of the reactor is given in the figure 6. The physical equations describing the process are (34) and (35):</p><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66874"><label>(34)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\c786181b-0175-45bb-bdbb-7d5a36c90ef1.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.17548-formula66875"><label>(35)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="2-9601054\8b4d7fe6-f0e5-4843-a131-cc7980a15e2b.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="2-9601054\0e00ae18-8c96-4e98-ab5a-f0d73360d988.jpg" /> is the height of the mixture in the reactor, <img src="2-9601054\85031674-4dc6-4ee4-a0e4-573ba9e647bb.jpg" />(respectively<img src="2-9601054\0364bc77-d8d0-4f1d-943c-d534e019a4cf.jpg" />) is the feed of reactant 1 (respectively reactant 2) and <img src="2-9601054\48a8d5d5-1faf-4322-93d5-bc448aa4dcf8.jpg" /> (respectively<img src="2-9601054\a8f0cd6b-08a3-48da-8456-228e868c82ec.jpg" />) is the concentration of reactant 1(respectively reactant 2). <img src="2-9601054\42e0aa6f-51d8-4548-aedb-8c281cca749e.jpg" />is the feed product of reaction and its concentration is<img src="2-9601054\914c00af-31c8-49aa-9ff1-8407b7c241b0.jpg" />.<img src="2-9601054\772f8a2e-a3ef-4667-9da2-30229ab48f24.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\dd8c5b3f-284f-4552-8e74-e525272f3219.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\23da3e40-6879-47d0-84fc-7a7c3c59ff68.jpg" />and <img src="2-9601054\78c0375a-68fe-4faa-a7d3-6321299901ab.jpg" /> are consumption reactant rate. They are assumed to be constant. The temperature in the reactor is assumed constant and equal to the ambient temperature. The feed of reactant <img src="2-9601054\14846cdc-0901-4ab2-95dc-09485ff46ec1.jpg" /> and the concentration <img src="2-9601054\861f31ff-4528-4d45-8239-a64379f7bc4f.jpg" /> are the input of the process however <img src="2-9601054\a70b0b32-cc86-4ace-a0f1-a33eee822d5d.jpg" /> represents its output. A diagram of the reactor is given in the figure 7.</p><p>For the purpose of the simulations the CSTR model of the reactor provided with Simulink-Matlab is used.</p><p>In figure 8, the responses of the chemical reactor, the model that produced by MLP and optimized RBF model by the gradient descent method are presented. In figure 9, the responses of the chemical reactor, the MLP model and the optimized RBF model by genetic algorithms are illustrated.</p><p>In figures 8 and 9, the responses of the optimized RBF model by the GD method and MLP model follow the response of chemical reactor. Indeed, in figure 8, the MLP model is carried out with 5 neurons in input layer, 25 neurons in first hidden layer, 22 neurons in hidden layer and the learning rate equal to 0.4. However, the RBF model depends only 3 layers, the second and the only hidden layer contains 11 neurons. The used parameters in the GD method are<img src="2-9601054\d870e379-bba0-42fc-9c6d-416cbbd79df8.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\09c2961d-9017-4def-a4b8-53a8830b9e88.jpg" />and<img src="2-9601054\9f8111dd-e540-4b19-a30f-3a09f62d90fe.jpg" />. In contrary, in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig9">Figure 9</xref>, the parameter of</p><p>RBF model are optimized separately (<img src="2-9601054\164be6e0-fb30-4e3a-83b1-82b044943a53.jpg" />and<img src="2-9601054\0799c2dc-f09d-495e-93ba-148f84c7c8c9.jpg" />) using GA and (<img src="2-9601054\0a786779-35ea-46ba-a491-e76f462bd7d5.jpg" />) using gradient descent. These parameters are<img src="2-9601054\b7fd34eb-700c-416a-b2eb-ad159da6365b.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\0d536310-6e9e-4952-a49c-8aafae7b2060.jpg" />, <img src="2-9601054\3b649a46-9d6d-48a3-8702-6e92851d5d41.jpg" />and<img src="2-9601054\48873446-0c38-4985-bd1a-13a2cba9be5f.jpg" />.</p><p>The NMSE is given in the table below:</p><p><img src="2-9601054\e2df06c8-ab20-416c-9c33-a08d67a49c3c.jpg" /></p><p>From this table, the NMSE computed in the RBF model optimized by the genetic algorithms method is lower than that found by applying the gradient descent method which proves that the evolutionary algorithms give good accuracy for modeling methods of dynamical systems.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>This paper has dealt with the study and the comparison of two systems modeling techniques the multilayer network model and the radial basis function neural network model. These two approaches are applied in a class of nonlinear system with time-varying parameters. It has been shown that the MLP architecture depends on various parameters and of course a much training time. However, the RBF model depends on the synaptic weights, center and width of its function. In this paper, the RBF model is optimized by gradient descent method and genetic algorithms. Each optimized RBF models are compared with multilayer perceptron. Mean square error is carried out to evaluate performance of both models and the influence of an additive noise on the identification qualities. These models have been tested for modeling of chemical reactor and results are successful. The RBF model optimized by genetic algorithms showed good performance compared to that optimized by gradient descent method.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>REFERENCES</title></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Nomenclature</title><p><img src="2-9601054\48fe2e48-6cee-47c6-978b-c9068b2eb6ca.jpg" />: process output,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\0aa36982-4b6b-4135-92a6-4cde8b9be4ef.jpg" />: process input,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\89e156eb-00fd-4526-9776-ff7d05ebeadd.jpg" />: unknown function,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\353f893f-06f1-4f2b-9fc1-242e01a37f99.jpg" />: output delay,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\5ccf8494-127b-48c0-ae18-ac1c8f9653f5.jpg" />: input delay, <img src="2-9601054\e1bd5030-1b7a-4c3b-8e90-961a64e30e20.jpg" />,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\8a59f72d-91d2-48f0-8726-eb19e804268e.jpg" />: output of MLP,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\30aa548a-3d9f-4077-8144-89602350e781.jpg" />: input vector of (MLP or RBF),</p><p><img src="2-9601054\c103c70b-c806-4ed6-9c6c-f42d2513cade.jpg" />: number of hidden layer,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\baa43609-c720-45c6-9617-5f54f38fd0a0.jpg" />: number of nodes of input layer,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\f7624ae0-2b3d-4858-81f9-fadf11a08934.jpg" />: number of nodes of hidden layer,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\759f5e16-04a1-485b-8426-f46593325b1a.jpg" />: number of nodes of output layer,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\3710d4c6-69da-4707-a294-f90b885f2fb1.jpg" />: synaptic weights of MLP,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\5837cf0d-10f5-413d-9262-94b98e360d05.jpg" />: activation function,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\152e9649-2f1b-4ec2-a5be-18170c90d97a.jpg" />: learning rate,&#160;</p><p><img src="2-9601054\fdfd8603-43f8-498f-8320-f60e9414a18b.jpg" />: regularization coefficient,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\9a65b279-9082-41d6-900a-0b4de7d088ee.jpg" />: output of RBF,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\00d884f9-52ef-4f0e-a9c4-70d086bc6a12.jpg" />: hidden radial basis function,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\b00e8598-4256-44c4-91d7-08086fd18609.jpg" />: hidden center,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\810e2a20-a345-46b0-b959-71b3efb88ac1.jpg" />: hidden width,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\cfd3cae9-a35c-4a53-b52f-8f4b7449d71d.jpg" />: synaptic weights of RBF,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\48ea6797-8de8-41da-abbc-ebbaa3e4d231.jpg" />: crossover probability,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\0a711ab3-fc40-430d-98cd-c3ca2130f355.jpg" />: mutation probability,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\65839cbb-5b36-4a5b-9e5b-29edc76c47c3.jpg" />: size generation,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\fe86c756-0c81-419a-9ffb-7557a050b024.jpg" />: white noise,</p><p><img src="2-9601054\c6eec987-dfdf-48e5-83f2-af7d07da2fb4.jpg" />: number of observationsSNR: Signal Noise Ratio.</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.17548-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">V. Cutello, G. Narzisi, G. Nicosia and M. Pavone, “An Immunological Algorithm for Global Numerical Optimization,” Artificial Evolution: 7th International Conference, Evolution Artificielle, Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 3871, 2006, pp. 284-295.  
doi:10.1007/11740698_25</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">W. Gong, Z. Cai and L. Jiang, “Enhancing the Performance of Differential Evolution Using Orthogonal Design Method,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, Vol. 206, No. 1, 2008, pp. 56-69.  
doi:10.1016/j.amc.2008.08.053</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">R. Storn and K. Price, “Differential Evolution—A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for Global Optimization over Continuous Spaces,” Journal of Global Optimization, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1997, pp. 341-359.  
doi:10.1023/A:1008202821328</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. Sun, Q. Zhang and E. P. K. Tsang, “DE/EDA: A New Evolutionary Algorithm for Global Optimization,” Information Sciences, Vol. 169, No. 3-4, 2005, pp. 249-262.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. M. Ali, C. Storey and A. Torn, “Application of Some Recent Stochastic Global Optimization Algorithms to Practical Problems,” TUCS Technical Report No. 47, Turku Centre for Computer Science, Turku, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. P. Schwefel, “Numerical Optimization of Computer Models,” John Wiley &amp; Sons, Chichester, 1981.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. H. Holland, “Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems,” University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1975.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">I. Rechenberg, “Evolution Strategy: Optimization of Technical Systems by Means of Biological Evolution,” Fromman-Holzboog, Stuttgart, 1973.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. R. Koza, “Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural Selection,” The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">D. B. Fogel, “Applying Evolutionary Programming to Selected Traveling Salesman Problems,” Cybernetics and Systems, Vol. 24, No. 1, 1993, pp. 27-36.  
doi:10.1080/01969729308961697</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">K. E. Parsopoulos and M. N. Vrahatis, “Recent Approaches to Global Optimization Problems through Particle Swarm Optimization,” Natural Computing, Vol. 1, No. 2-3, 2002, pp. 235-306.  
doi:10.1023/A:1016568309421</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. Kennedy and R. C. Eberhart, “Particle Swarm Optimization,” Proceedings of the 1995 IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, Vol. 4, Perth, 27 November-1 December 1995, pp. 1942-1948.  
doi:10.1109/ICNN.1995.488968</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">D. Karabo?a and S. ?kdem, “A Simple and Global Optimization Algorithm for Engineering Problems: Differential Evolution Algorithm,” Turk Journal of Electrical Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2004, pp. 53-60.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. Vesterstrom and R. Thomsen, “A Comparative Study of Differential Evolution, Particle Swarm Optimization, and Evolutionary Algorithms on Numerical Benchmark Problems,” 2004 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 2, Portland, 19-23 June 2004, pp. 19801987.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. J. Liang, A. K. Qin, P. N. Suganthan and S. Baskar, “Comprehensive Learning Particle Swarm Optimizer for Global Optimization of Multi-Modal Functions,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2006, pp. 281-295. doi:10.1109/TEVC.2005.857610</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">R. Storn and K. Price, “Differential Evolution—A Simple and Efficient Adaptive Scheme for Global Optimization over Continuous Spaces,” Technical Report TR-95-012, International Computer Science Institute, Berkeley, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">K. Price, R. Storn and J. Lampinen, “Differential Evolution: A Practical Approach to Global Optimization,” Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. Brest, S. Greiner, B. Boskovic, M. Mernik and V. Zumer, “Self-Adapting Control Parameters in Differential Evolution: A Comparative Study on Numerical Benchmark Problems,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2006, pp. 646-657.  
doi:10.1109/TEVC.2006.872133</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">A. K. Qin and P. N. Suganthan, “Self-Adaptive Differential Evolution Algorithm for Numerical Optimization,” Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 2, 2005, pp. 1785-1791.  
doi:10.1109/CEC.2005.1554904</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. Das, A. Abraham, U. K. Chakraborty and A. Konar, “Differential Evolution Using a Neighborhood-Based Mutation Operator,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 13, No. 3, 2009, pp. 526-553.  
doi:10.1109/TEVC.2008.2009457</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. Rahnamayan and G. G. Wang, “Solving Large Scale Optimization Problems by Opposition-Based Differential Evolution (ODE),” WSEAS Transactions on Computers, Vol. 7, No. 10, 2008, pp. 1792-1804.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. Rahnamayan, H. R. Tizhoosh and M. M. A. Salama, “Opposition-Based Differential Evolution,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2008, pp. 64-79. doi:10.1109/TEVC.2007.894200</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. Rahnamayan, H. R. Tizhoosh and M. M. A. Salama, “Opposition versus Randomness in Soft Computing Techniques,” Elsevier Journal on Applied Soft Computing, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2008, pp. 906-918.  
doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2007.07.010</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. R. Tizhoosh, “Opposition-Based Reinforcement Learning,” Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2006, pp. 578585.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. A. Abbass, R. Sarker and C. Newton, “PDE: A Paretofrontier Differential Evolution Approach for Multi-Objective Optimization Problems,” 2001 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 2, Seoul, 27-30 May 2001, pp. 971978.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. Ali, M. Pant and V. P. Singh, “Two Modified Differential Evolution Algorithms and Their Applications to Engineering Design Problems,” World Journal of Modelling and Simulation, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2010, pp.72-80.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Z. Y. Yang, K. Tang and X. Yao, “Self-Adaptive Differential Evolution with Neighborhood Search,” 2008 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Hong Kong, 1-6 June 2008, pp. 1110-1116.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Z. Michalewicz, “Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs,” 3rd Edition, Springer, Berlin, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">K. Zielinski, P. Weitkemper, R. Laur and K.-D. Kammeyer, “Examination of Stopping Criteria for Differential Evolution Based on a Power Allocation Problem,” Pro ceedings of the 10th International Conference on Optimization of Electrical and Electronic Equipment, Vol. 3, Brasov, 18-19 May 2006, pp. 149-156.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Y. Ao and H. Chi, “An Adaptive Differential Evolution Algorithm to Solve Constrained Optimization Problems in Engineering Design,” Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2010, pp. 65-77. doi:10.4236/eng.2010.21009</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">C. Dai, W. Chen, Y. Song and Y. Zhu, “Seeker Optimization Algorithm: A Novel Stochastic Search Algorithm for Global Numerical Optimization,” Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, Vol. 21, No. 2, 2010, pp. 300311.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">X. Yao, Y. Liu and G. Lin, “Evolutionary Programming Made Faster,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1999, pp. 82-102.  
doi:10.1109/4235.771163</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.17548-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">A.-R. Hedar and M. Fukushima, “Directed Evolutionary Programming: Towards an Improved Performance of Evolutionary Programming,” 2006 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Vancouver, 11 September 2006, pp. 1521-1528.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>