Enhanced mountain gazelle optimizer for global performance

i

This article has been updated. A Correction to this article was published on .

i

The Original Article was published on

i

The Original Article was published on

i

This article has been updated

i

This article was retracted on

i

This article has been updated

Abstract

In this paper, we present the Enhanced Mountain Gazelle Optimizer (EnMGO), a new variant of the mountain gazelle optimizer developed to address the persistent challenge of balancing exploration and exploitation in high-dimensional optimization. While earlier modifications of the algorithm focused on reformulating the control F-parameter to improve stability, they remained limited in adaptability and convergence efficiency. The proposed EnMGO introduces two modifications: An inertia weight based on a chaotic random technique to improve global exploration, and an exponentially decreasing formulation of the F-parameter to enhance local exploitation. These mechanisms create a more adaptive search process capable of efficiently navigating complex solution spaces. The algorithm was evaluated on a set of standard benchmark functions and engineering design problems, and the results demonstrated that EnMGO consistently outperforms previous variants, achieving faster convergence and higher-quality solutions. It achieved better results in approximately 86.96% of the total 23 benchmark functions considered in the study, thereby highlighting its robustness and effectiveness. Furthermore, in the application to engineering design optimization problems, the EnMGO consistently outperformed the comparative algorithms across both design cases, reaffirming its potential as a highly reliable and efficient optimization tool. Based on the performance, the potential of EnMGO can be explored for application in real engineering optimization problems.

Keywords

algorithm / inertia weight / mountain gazelle / metaheuristic / optimizer

CHANGE HISTORY

A Correction to this paper has been published:
https://doi.org

The Retraction Note was updated to reflect reception of statements of disagreement from all authors.

This article has been retracted.Please see the Retraction Notice for more detail:
https://doi.org

References

[1] E. Osaba, E. Villar-Rodriguez, J. Del Ser, A. Nebro, D. Molina, A. LaTorre, et al., A tutorial on the design, experimentation and application of metaheuristic algorithms to real-world optimization problems, Swarm Evol. Comput., 64 (2021), 100888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2021.100888

[2] V. S. Prakash, V. Vinothina, K. Kalaiselvi, K. Velusamy, An improved bacterial colony optimization using opposition-based learning for data clustering, Cluster Comput., 25 (2022), 4009-4025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-022-03633-z

[3] S. M. Almufti, A. Ahmad Shaban, Z. Arif Ali, R. Ismael Ali, J. A. Dela Fuente, R. R. Asaad, Overview of metaheuristic algorithms, Global Journal of Scholarly Research and Trends, 2 (2023), 10-32. https://doi.org/10.58429/pgjsrt.v2n2a144

[4] B. A. Kumar, B. Jyothi, A. Singh, M. Bajaj, R. Rathore, M. Tuka, Hybrid genetic algorithm-simulated annealing based electric vehicle charging station placement for optimizing distribution network resilience, Sci. Rep., 14 (2024), 7637. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-58024-8

[5] T. Dokeroglu, E. Sevinc, T. Kucukyilmaz, A. Cosar, A survey on new generation metaheuristic algorithms, Comput. Ind. Eng., 137 (2019), 106040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106040

[6] S. Katoch, S. S. Chauhan, V. Kumar, A review on genetic algorithm: past, present, and future, Multimed. Tools Appl., 80 (2021), 8091-8126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-10139-6

[7] A. G. Gad, Particle swarm optimization algorithm and its applications: a systematic review, Arch. Computat. Methods Eng., 29 (2022), 2531-2561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-021-09694-4

[8] S. Makhadmeh, M. Al-Betar, I. Doush, M. Awadallah, S. Kassaymeh, S. Mirjalili, et al., Recent advances in Grey Wolf Optimizer, its versions and applications: review, IEEE Access, 12 (2023), 22991-23028. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3304889

[9] E. Kaya, B. Gorkemli, B. Akay, D. Karaboga, A review on the studies employing artificial bee colony algorithm to solve combinatorial optimization problems, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intel., 115 (2022), 105311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105311

[10] A. Yussif, S. Adjei, B. Wilson, Sigmoid-function-based adaptive pelican optimization algorithm for global optimization, IJEEAS, 7 (2024), 15-25. https://doi.org/10.54554/ijeeas.2024.7.02.003

[11] S. Syama, J. Ramprabhakar, R. Anand, J. M. Guerrero, A hybrid extreme learning machine model with lévy flight chaotic whale optimization algorithm for wind speed forecasting, Results in Engineering, 19 (2023), 101274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2023.101274

[12] V. Tomar, M. Bansal, P. Singh, Metaheuristic algorithms for optimization: a brief review, Eng. Proc., 59 (2023), 238. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2023059238

[13] B. Abdollahzadeh, F. S. Gharehchopogh, N. Khodadadi, S. Mirjalili, Mountain gazelle optimizer: a new nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithm for global optimization problems, Adv. Eng. Softw., 174 (2022), 103282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2022.103282

[14] G. Nayeem, M. Fan, Y. Akhter, A time-varying adaptive inertia weight based modified PSO algorithm for UAV path planning, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Robotics, Electrical and Signal Processing Techniques (ICREST), 2021, 573-576. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICREST51555.2021.9331101

[15] T. Seini, A. Yussif, I. M. Katali, Enhancing mountain gazelle optimizer (MGO) with an improved F-parameter for global optimization, Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol, 10 (2023), 921-930.

[16] J. Bansal, P. Singh, M. Saraswat, A. Verma, S. Jadon, A. Abraham, Inertia weight strategies in particle swarm optimization, Proceedings of the Third World Congress on Nature and Biologically Inspired Computing, 2011, 640-647. https://doi.org/10.1109/NaBIC.2011.6089659

[17] R. Naik, U. Singh, A review on applications of chaotic maps in pseudo-random number generators and encryption, Ann. Data Sci., 11 (2024), 25-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40745-021-00364-7

[18] A. Seini Yussif, E. Twumasi, E. Asuming Frimpong, Modified mountain gazelle optimizer based on logistic chaotic mapping and truncation selection, Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol, 10 (2023), 1769-1776.

[19] A. Seini Yussif, T. Seini, Improved F-parameter mountain gazelle optimizer (IFMGO): a comparative analysis on engineering design problems, Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol., 10 (2023), 810-816.

[20] M. Jain, V. Saihjpal, N. Singh, S. B. Singh, An overview of variants and advancements of PSO algorithm, Appl. Sci., 12 (2022), 8392. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12178392

[21] W. Aribowo, L. Abualigah, D. Oliva, A. Prapanca, A novel modified mountain gazelle optimizer for tuning parameter proportional integral derivative of DC motor, BEEI, 13 (2024), 745-752. https://doi.org/10.11591/eei.v13i2.5575

[22] P. Sarangi, P. Mohapatra, Evolved opposition-based mountain gazelle optimizer to solve optimization problems, J. King Saud Univ.-Com., 35 (2023), 101812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2023.101812

[23] P. Trojovský, M. Dehghani, Pelican optimization algorithm: a novel nature-inspired algorithm for engineering applications, Sensors, 22 (2022), 855. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22030855

[24] N. Khodadadi, E. S. M. El-Kenawy, F. De Caso, A. H. Alharbi, D. S. Khafaga, A. Nanni, The mountain gazelle optimizer for truss structures optimization, Applied Computing and Intelligence, 3 (2023), 116-144. https://doi.org/10.3934/aci.2023007