Performance Assessment of Metaheuristic Algorithms: Firefly, Grey Wolf, and Moth Flame in Coal Pyrolysis Kinetic Parameter Estimation

Vishnu Uppalakkal, Venkatesh Ambati, Rajesh Nair
{"title":"Performance Assessment of Metaheuristic Algorithms: Firefly, Grey Wolf, and Moth Flame in Coal Pyrolysis Kinetic Parameter Estimation","authors":"Vishnu Uppalakkal, Venkatesh Ambati, Rajesh Nair","doi":"10.33889/ijmems.2024.9.1.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the effectiveness of the Firefly Optimizer (FFA), Grey Wolf Optimizer (GWO), and Moth Flame Optimizer (MFO) metaheuristic algorithms in estimating the kinetic parameters of a single-step coal pyrolysis model. By examining the effects of the algorithmic configuration, the initial parameter estimates, and the search space size on the efficacy and efficiency of the optimization run, the research seeks to encourage the qualified engineering application of these algorithms in the field of pyrolysis modeling. Four critical analyses were conducted: convergence efficiency, robustness and repeatability, parameter tuning, and performance on noisy data. MFO and GWO had comparable fitness scores of 1.05×10-4 and 1.04×10-4 respectively in the optimisation run analysis, while FireFly Algorithm (FFA) fell behind with a score of 1.09×10-4. Regarding the calculation time, FFA showed better results than other optimizers with an execution time of 113.75 seconds. MFO showed initial promise in convergence analysis with speedy convergence, whereas GWO progressively enhanced its solutions. Additionally, GWO was shown to be the most dependable algorithm with the lowest values for average fitness score and execution time at 1.07×10-4 and 38.86 seconds. The combined values of standard deviation in fitness value and execution time for GWO were 1.07×10-6 and 0.35 indicating its robustness towards initial parameters. Similar to this, investigations on repeatability emphasized the reliability of the GWO method. Further, the parameter tuning assessments supported the balanced performance of GWO, and the studies of noise handling discovered GWO to be the most robust to noisy data. Overall, GWO is recommended as a one-stop average solution for the general engineered application; however, algorithm choice hinges on the specific requirement.","PeriodicalId":517298,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences","volume":"15 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33889/ijmems.2024.9.1.002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigates the effectiveness of the Firefly Optimizer (FFA), Grey Wolf Optimizer (GWO), and Moth Flame Optimizer (MFO) metaheuristic algorithms in estimating the kinetic parameters of a single-step coal pyrolysis model. By examining the effects of the algorithmic configuration, the initial parameter estimates, and the search space size on the efficacy and efficiency of the optimization run, the research seeks to encourage the qualified engineering application of these algorithms in the field of pyrolysis modeling. Four critical analyses were conducted: convergence efficiency, robustness and repeatability, parameter tuning, and performance on noisy data. MFO and GWO had comparable fitness scores of 1.05×10-4 and 1.04×10-4 respectively in the optimisation run analysis, while FireFly Algorithm (FFA) fell behind with a score of 1.09×10-4. Regarding the calculation time, FFA showed better results than other optimizers with an execution time of 113.75 seconds. MFO showed initial promise in convergence analysis with speedy convergence, whereas GWO progressively enhanced its solutions. Additionally, GWO was shown to be the most dependable algorithm with the lowest values for average fitness score and execution time at 1.07×10-4 and 38.86 seconds. The combined values of standard deviation in fitness value and execution time for GWO were 1.07×10-6 and 0.35 indicating its robustness towards initial parameters. Similar to this, investigations on repeatability emphasized the reliability of the GWO method. Further, the parameter tuning assessments supported the balanced performance of GWO, and the studies of noise handling discovered GWO to be the most robust to noisy data. Overall, GWO is recommended as a one-stop average solution for the general engineered application; however, algorithm choice hinges on the specific requirement.
元启发式算法的性能评估:煤热解动力学参数估计中的萤火虫算法、灰狼算法和飞蛾火焰算法
本研究调查了萤火虫优化器 (FFA)、灰狼优化器 (GWO) 和飞蛾火焰优化器 (MFO) 元启发式算法在估算单步煤热解模型动力学参数方面的有效性。通过研究算法配置、初始参数估计和搜索空间大小对优化运行的效果和效率的影响,该研究旨在鼓励这些算法在热解模型领域的合格工程应用。研究进行了四项关键分析:收敛效率、稳健性和可重复性、参数调整和噪声数据性能。在优化运行分析中,MFO 和 GWO 的合适度得分相当,分别为 1.05×10-4 和 1.04×10-4,而 FireFly 算法(FFA)则落后,得分为 1.09×10-4。在计算时间方面,FFA 以 113.75 秒的执行时间显示出比其他优化器更好的结果。MFO 在收敛分析中表现出了快速收敛的初步前景,而 GWO 则逐步增强了其解决方案。此外,GWO 被证明是最可靠的算法,其平均适应度得分和执行时间的值最低,分别为 1.07×10-4 和 38.86 秒。GWO 的适配值和执行时间的标准偏差之和分别为 1.07×10-6 和 0.35,表明其对初始参数的鲁棒性。同样,对重复性的研究也强调了 GWO 方法的可靠性。此外,参数调整评估支持了 GWO 的均衡性能,噪声处理研究发现 GWO 对噪声数据的鲁棒性最强。总体而言,建议将 GWO 作为一般工程应用的一站式平均解决方案;不过,算法的选择取决于具体要求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信