# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

• Previous Article
Mechanism design in project procurement auctions with cost uncertainty and failure risk
• JIMO Home
• This Issue
• Next Article
Optimal design of finite precision and infinite precision non-uniform cosine modulated filter bank
January  2019, 15(1): 113-130. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018035

## A novel modeling and smoothing technique in global optimization

 Suleyman Demirel University, Department of Mathematics, Isparta, 32100, Turkey

* Corresponding author: ahmetsahiner@sdu.edu.tr

Received  April 2017 Revised  January 2018 Published  April 2018

In this paper, we introduce a new methodology for modeling of the given data and finding the global optimum value of the model function. First, a new surface blending technique is offered by using Bezier curves and a smooth objective function is obtained with the help of this technique. Second, a new global optimization method followed by an adapted algorithm is presented to reach the global minimizer of the objective function. As an application of this new methodology, we consider energy conformation problem in Physical Chemistry as a very important real-world problem.

Citation: Ahmet Sahiner, Nurullah Yilmaz, Gulden Kapusuz. A novel modeling and smoothing technique in global optimization. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (1) : 113-130. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018035
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
The subregions of $\Omega = [0,360]\times[0,360]$
Constructed Bezier surfaces on the subregions $-438$ was taken as zero to remove the complexity
The graph of the function $\tilde{f}(x, y, \varepsilon, \delta)$ which is constructed by blending Bezier surfaces
The list of test problems
 Problem No. Function Name Dimension $n$ Region Optimum value 1 Two dimensional function $c=0.05$ $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 2 Two dimensional function $c=0.2$ $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 3 Two dimensional function $c=0.5$ $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 4 3-hump function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 5 6-hump function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $-1.0316$ 6 Treccani function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 7 Goldstein-Price function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $3.0000$ 8 Shubert function $2$ $[-10, 10]^2$ $-186.73091$ 9 Rastrigin function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $-2.0000$ 10 Branin function $2$ $[-5, 10]\times[10],[15]$ $0.3979$ 11 (S5) Shekel function $4$ $[0, 10]^4$ $-10.1532$ 12 (S7) Shekel function $4$ $[0, 10]^4$ $-10.4029$ 13 (S10) Shekel function $4$ $[0, 10]^4$ $-10.5364$ 14, 15, 16, 17 Sin-square I function $2, 3, 5, 7$ $[-10, 10]^n$ $0$ 18, 19, 20, 21 Sin-square I function $10, 20, 30, 50$ $[-10, 10]^n$ $0$
 Problem No. Function Name Dimension $n$ Region Optimum value 1 Two dimensional function $c=0.05$ $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 2 Two dimensional function $c=0.2$ $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 3 Two dimensional function $c=0.5$ $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 4 3-hump function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 5 6-hump function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $-1.0316$ 6 Treccani function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $0$ 7 Goldstein-Price function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $3.0000$ 8 Shubert function $2$ $[-10, 10]^2$ $-186.73091$ 9 Rastrigin function $2$ $[-3, 3]^2$ $-2.0000$ 10 Branin function $2$ $[-5, 10]\times[10],[15]$ $0.3979$ 11 (S5) Shekel function $4$ $[0, 10]^4$ $-10.1532$ 12 (S7) Shekel function $4$ $[0, 10]^4$ $-10.4029$ 13 (S10) Shekel function $4$ $[0, 10]^4$ $-10.5364$ 14, 15, 16, 17 Sin-square I function $2, 3, 5, 7$ $[-10, 10]^n$ $0$ 18, 19, 20, 21 Sin-square I function $10, 20, 30, 50$ $[-10, 10]^n$ $0$
The numerical results of our method
 Problem No. n iter-m f.eval-m f-mean f-best SR 1 $2$ $1.50004$ $214$ $5.9087e-15$ $2.6630e-154$ $8/10$ 2 $2$ $1.1250$ $290.6250$ $7.5789e-15$ $3.4336e-16$ $8/10$ 3 $2$ $1.7500$ $414.2857$ $4.0814e-15$ $4.7243e-16$ $8/10$ 4 $2$ $1.4000$ $411$ $4.8635e-15$ $2.8802e-16$ $10/10$ 5 $2$ $1.5000$ $234$ $-1.0316$ $-1.0316$ $10/10$ 6 $2$ $1.0000$ $216.5000$ $5.5963e-14$ $1.6477e-15$ $10/10$ 7 $2$ $1.2222$ $487.8889$ $3.0000$ $3.0000$ $9/10$ 8 $2$ $2.7000$ $813.5000$ $-186.7309$ $-186.7309$ $10/10$ 9 $2$ $3.4000$ $501$ $-2.0000$ $-2.0000$ $10/10$ 10 $2$ $1.0000$ $222.3000$ $0.3979$ $0.3979$ $10/10$ 11 $4$ $1.6667$ $1001$ $-10.1532$ $-10.1532$ $9/10$ 12 $4$ $1.7500$ $1365.1000$ $-10.4029$ $-10.4029$ $8/10$ 13 $4$ $1.2857$ $1412$ $-10.5321$ $-10.5321$ $7/10$ 14 $2$ $2.7500$ $743.2500$ $9.6751e-15$ $9.4192e-15$ $8/10$ 15 $3$ $1.9000$ $3027$ $1.3445e-14$ $5.6998e-15$ $10/10$ 16 $5$ $1.8000$ $4999.3$ $1.8351e-13$ $3.7007e-15$ $10/10$ 17 $7$ $1.7500$ $8171$ $1.7275e-14$ $1.3790e-14$ $8/10$ 18 $10$ $2.7778$ $8895.4$ $4.3639e-13$ $3.0992e-14$ $9/10$ 19 $20$ $2.7143$ $18242$ $2.2066e-12$ $3.0016e-13$ $7/10$ 20 $30$ $3.5000$ $43232$ $6.9372e-12$ $1.7361e-12$ $6/10$ 21 $50$ $2.5000$ $83243$ $7.0303e-12$ $9.8531e-13$ $6/10$
 Problem No. n iter-m f.eval-m f-mean f-best SR 1 $2$ $1.50004$ $214$ $5.9087e-15$ $2.6630e-154$ $8/10$ 2 $2$ $1.1250$ $290.6250$ $7.5789e-15$ $3.4336e-16$ $8/10$ 3 $2$ $1.7500$ $414.2857$ $4.0814e-15$ $4.7243e-16$ $8/10$ 4 $2$ $1.4000$ $411$ $4.8635e-15$ $2.8802e-16$ $10/10$ 5 $2$ $1.5000$ $234$ $-1.0316$ $-1.0316$ $10/10$ 6 $2$ $1.0000$ $216.5000$ $5.5963e-14$ $1.6477e-15$ $10/10$ 7 $2$ $1.2222$ $487.8889$ $3.0000$ $3.0000$ $9/10$ 8 $2$ $2.7000$ $813.5000$ $-186.7309$ $-186.7309$ $10/10$ 9 $2$ $3.4000$ $501$ $-2.0000$ $-2.0000$ $10/10$ 10 $2$ $1.0000$ $222.3000$ $0.3979$ $0.3979$ $10/10$ 11 $4$ $1.6667$ $1001$ $-10.1532$ $-10.1532$ $9/10$ 12 $4$ $1.7500$ $1365.1000$ $-10.4029$ $-10.4029$ $8/10$ 13 $4$ $1.2857$ $1412$ $-10.5321$ $-10.5321$ $7/10$ 14 $2$ $2.7500$ $743.2500$ $9.6751e-15$ $9.4192e-15$ $8/10$ 15 $3$ $1.9000$ $3027$ $1.3445e-14$ $5.6998e-15$ $10/10$ 16 $5$ $1.8000$ $4999.3$ $1.8351e-13$ $3.7007e-15$ $10/10$ 17 $7$ $1.7500$ $8171$ $1.7275e-14$ $1.3790e-14$ $8/10$ 18 $10$ $2.7778$ $8895.4$ $4.3639e-13$ $3.0992e-14$ $9/10$ 19 $20$ $2.7143$ $18242$ $2.2066e-12$ $3.0016e-13$ $7/10$ 20 $30$ $3.5000$ $43232$ $6.9372e-12$ $1.7361e-12$ $6/10$ 21 $50$ $2.5000$ $83243$ $7.0303e-12$ $9.8531e-13$ $6/10$
The comparison of the results
 No n Our Method Ma et. al [16] El-Gindy et. al [5] iter-m f.eval-m iter-m f.eval-m iter-m f.eval-m 1 $2$ $1.5$ $214$ $4$ $5097$ $2$ $310$ 2 $2$ $1.13$ $290.6$ $3$ $4012$ $2$ $778$ 3 $2$ $1.75$ $414.3$ $3$ $2507$ $3$ $977$ 4 $2$ $1.4$ $411$ $3$ $545$ $2$ $577$ 5 $2$ $1.5$ $234$ $3$ $518$ $2$ $279$ 6 $2$ $1.2$ $216.5$ $1$ $595$ $2$ $265$ 7 $2$ $2.7$ $487.9$ $3$ $8140$ $-$ $-$ 8 $2$ $3.4$ $813.5$ $3$ $5280$ $3$ $635$ 9 $2$ $1$ $501$ $3$ $337$ $2$ $315$ 10 $2$ $1$ $222.3$ $3$ $1819$ $-$ $-$ 14 $2$ $2.75$ $743.3$ $3$ $536$ $3$ $549$ 15 $3$ $1.9$ $3027$ $1$ $6083$ $2$ $1283$ 16 $5$ $1.8$ $4999.3$ $1$ $7839$ $2$ $5291$ 17 $7$ $1.75$ $8171$ $4$ $10130$ $2$ $12793$ 18 $10$ $2.78$ $8895.4$ $2$ $29463$ $2$ $33810$ 19 $20$ $2.71$ $18242$ $-$ $-$ $2$ $96223$ 20 $30$ $3.5$ $43232$ $-$ $-$ $4$ $376885$ 21 $50$ $2.5$ $83243$ $-$ $-$ $9$ $>10^6$
 No n Our Method Ma et. al [16] El-Gindy et. al [5] iter-m f.eval-m iter-m f.eval-m iter-m f.eval-m 1 $2$ $1.5$ $214$ $4$ $5097$ $2$ $310$ 2 $2$ $1.13$ $290.6$ $3$ $4012$ $2$ $778$ 3 $2$ $1.75$ $414.3$ $3$ $2507$ $3$ $977$ 4 $2$ $1.4$ $411$ $3$ $545$ $2$ $577$ 5 $2$ $1.5$ $234$ $3$ $518$ $2$ $279$ 6 $2$ $1.2$ $216.5$ $1$ $595$ $2$ $265$ 7 $2$ $2.7$ $487.9$ $3$ $8140$ $-$ $-$ 8 $2$ $3.4$ $813.5$ $3$ $5280$ $3$ $635$ 9 $2$ $1$ $501$ $3$ $337$ $2$ $315$ 10 $2$ $1$ $222.3$ $3$ $1819$ $-$ $-$ 14 $2$ $2.75$ $743.3$ $3$ $536$ $3$ $549$ 15 $3$ $1.9$ $3027$ $1$ $6083$ $2$ $1283$ 16 $5$ $1.8$ $4999.3$ $1$ $7839$ $2$ $5291$ 17 $7$ $1.75$ $8171$ $4$ $10130$ $2$ $12793$ 18 $10$ $2.78$ $8895.4$ $2$ $29463$ $2$ $33810$ 19 $20$ $2.71$ $18242$ $-$ $-$ $2$ $96223$ 20 $30$ $3.5$ $43232$ $-$ $-$ $4$ $376885$ 21 $50$ $2.5$ $83243$ $-$ $-$ $9$ $>10^6$
Numerical Results
 $k$ $\alpha$ $\beta$ $x_0$ $x_k^*$ $f_k^*$ 1 $0.5$ $0.1$ (160.0000,280.0000) $(190.2613,277.4205)$ $-438.2412$ 2 $0.5$ $0.1$ $(190.2613,277.4205)$ $(329.0062,186.9678)$ $-438.2625$ 3 $0.5$ $0.1$ $(329.0062,186.9678)$ $(181.6167,187.5836)$ $-438.2678$
 $k$ $\alpha$ $\beta$ $x_0$ $x_k^*$ $f_k^*$ 1 $0.5$ $0.1$ (160.0000,280.0000) $(190.2613,277.4205)$ $-438.2412$ 2 $0.5$ $0.1$ $(190.2613,277.4205)$ $(329.0062,186.9678)$ $-438.2625$ 3 $0.5$ $0.1$ $(329.0062,186.9678)$ $(181.6167,187.5836)$ $-438.2678$
 [1] Habib Ammari, Josselin Garnier, Vincent Jugnon. Detection, reconstruction, and characterization algorithms from noisy data in multistatic wave imaging. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2015, 8 (3) : 389-417. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2015.8.389 [2] Guido De Philippis, Antonio De Rosa, Jonas Hirsch. The area blow up set for bounded mean curvature submanifolds with respect to elliptic surface energy functionals. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2019, 39 (12) : 7031-7056. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2019243 [3] Baba Issa Camara, Houda Mokrani, Evans K. Afenya. Mathematical modeling of glioma therapy using oncolytic viruses. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2013, 10 (3) : 565-578. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2013.10.565 [4] Rafael Luís, Sandra Mendonça. A note on global stability in the periodic logistic map. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020, 25 (11) : 4211-4220. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020094 [5] Lakmi Niwanthi Wadippuli, Ivan Gudoshnikov, Oleg Makarenkov. Global asymptotic stability of nonconvex sweeping processes. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020, 25 (3) : 1129-1139. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2019212 [6] Ardeshir Ahmadi, Hamed Davari-Ardakani. A multistage stochastic programming framework for cardinality constrained portfolio optimization. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2017, 7 (3) : 359-377. doi: 10.3934/naco.2017023 [7] Luke Finlay, Vladimir Gaitsgory, Ivan Lebedev. Linear programming solutions of periodic optimization problems: approximation of the optimal control. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2007, 3 (2) : 399-413. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2007.3.399 [8] Marion Darbas, Jérémy Heleine, Stephanie Lohrengel. Numerical resolution by the quasi-reversibility method of a data completion problem for Maxwell's equations. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2020, 14 (6) : 1107-1133. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2020056 [9] Ronald E. Mickens. Positivity preserving discrete model for the coupled ODE's modeling glycolysis. Conference Publications, 2003, 2003 (Special) : 623-629. doi: 10.3934/proc.2003.2003.623 [10] Xu Zhang, Xiang Li. Modeling and identification of dynamical system with Genetic Regulation in batch fermentation of glycerol. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2015, 5 (4) : 393-403. doi: 10.3934/naco.2015.5.393 [11] Carlos Gutierrez, Nguyen Van Chau. A remark on an eigenvalue condition for the global injectivity of differentiable maps of $R^2$. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2007, 17 (2) : 397-402. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2007.17.397 [12] Brandy Rapatski, James Yorke. Modeling HIV outbreaks: The male to female prevalence ratio in the core population. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2009, 6 (1) : 135-143. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2009.6.135 [13] Bernold Fiedler, Carlos Rocha, Matthias Wolfrum. Sturm global attractors for $S^1$-equivariant parabolic equations. Networks & Heterogeneous Media, 2012, 7 (4) : 617-659. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2012.7.617 [14] Christina Surulescu, Nicolae Surulescu. Modeling and simulation of some cell dispersion problems by a nonparametric method. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2011, 8 (2) : 263-277. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2011.8.263 [15] Hong Seng Sim, Wah June Leong, Chuei Yee Chen, Siti Nur Iqmal Ibrahim. Multi-step spectral gradient methods with modified weak secant relation for large scale unconstrained optimization. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2018, 8 (3) : 377-387. doi: 10.3934/naco.2018024 [16] Irena PawŃow, Wojciech M. Zajączkowski. Global regular solutions to three-dimensional thermo-visco-elasticity with nonlinear temperature-dependent specific heat. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2017, 16 (4) : 1331-1372. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2017065

2019 Impact Factor: 1.366