Table 1.
Current research on improved metaheuristic algorithms.
Fig 1.
The linearly decreasing convergence factor a.
Fig 2.
Population initialized by Pseudo-Random Number.
Fig 3.
Population initialized by Good Nodes Set.
Fig 4.
Simulation of Spiral flight.
Fig 5.
Simulation of Levy flight.
Fig 6.
Comparison of different types of inertia weight .
Fig 7.
Comparison of the original a and the proposed a.
Table 2.
Results of parameter sensitivity analysis experiment. LSWOA(20,25) means k1=20, k2=25; LSWOA(25,20) means k1=25, k2=20.
Fig 8.
Performance of LSWOA in qualitative analysis experiment (F1-F8).
Fig 9.
Performance of LSWOA in qualitative analysis experiment (F9-F16).
Fig 10.
Performance of LSWOA in qualitative analysis experiment (F17-F23).
Fig 11.
Iterative curves of the algorithms in ablation study.
Fig 12.
Iterative curves of the algorithms in comparison experiment.
Table 3.
Parameter settings for metaheuristic algorithms.
Table 4.
Details of the metaheuristic algorithms in comparison experiments.
Table 5.
Results of parametric tests of different algorithms. Ave indicates average fitness, Std indicates standard deviation.
Table 6.
Results of non-parametric tests of different algorithms.
Table 7.
Results of non-parametric tests of different algorithms in higher dimensions.
Table 8.
Effectiveness of LSWOA and other SOTA algorithms with D=30, 50 and 100.
Fig 13.
Iteration curves of the algorithms in the Three-bar Truss design problem.
Fig 14.
Iteration curves of the algorithms in Tension/Compression Spring design problem.
Fig 15.
Iteration curves of the algorithms in Speed Reducer design problem.
Fig 16.
Iteration curves of the algorithms in Cantilever Beam design problem.
Fig 17.
Iteration curves of the algorithms in I-beam design problem.
Fig 18.
Iteration curves of the algorithms in Piston Lever design problem.
Fig 19.
Iteration curves of the algorithms in Gas Transmission System design problem.
Table 9.
Average fitness and standard deviation of each algorithm across the seven engineering design problems. Ave indicates average fitness, Std indicates standard deviation.
Table 10.
Standard benchmark functions [42].
Fig 20.
The structure of a three-bar truss.
Fig 21.
The structure of a tension/compression spring.
Fig 22.
The structure of a speed reducer.
Fig 23.
The structure of a cantilever beam.
Fig 24.
The structure of an I-beam.
Fig 25.
The structure of a piston lever.
Fig 26.
The structure of a gas transmission system.