International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856

Randomized Memetic Artificial Bee Colony
Algorithm
Sandeep Kumar1, Dr. Vivek Kumar Sharma2 and Rajani Kumari3
1,2 & 3

Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Jagannath University,
Chaksu, Jaipur, Rajasthan 303901, India

Abstract:

Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) optimization
algorithm is one of the recent population based probabilistic
approach developed for global optimization. ABC is simple
and has been showed significant improvement over other
Nature Inspired Algorithms (NIAs) when tested over some
standard benchmark functions and for some complex real
world optimization problems. Memetic Algorithms also
become one of the key methodologies to solve the very large
and complex real-world optimization problems. The solution
search equation of Memetic ABC is based on Golden Section
Search and an arbitrary value which tries to balance
exploration and exploitation of search space. But still there
are some chances to skip the exact solution due to its step
size. In order to balance between diversification and
intensification capability of the Memetic ABC, it is
randomized the step size in Memetic ABC. The proposed
algorithm is named as Randomized Memetic ABC (RMABC).
In RMABC, new solutions are generated nearby the best so
far solution and it helps to increase the exploitation capability
of Memetic ABC. The experiments on some test problems of
different complexities and one well known engineering
optimization application show that the proposed algorithm
outperforms over Memetic ABC (MeABC) and some other
variant of ABC algorithm(like
Gbest guided ABC
(GABC),Hooke Jeeves ABC (HJABC), Best-So-Far ABC
(BSFABC) and Modified ABC (MABC) in case of almost all
the problems.

Keywords: Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm, Memetic
Computing, Swarm Intelligence, Nature Inspired
Computing.

1. INTRODUCTION
Optimization is a field of research with large number of
applications in almost each and every area of science,
management and engineering, where mathematical
modeling is used. Global optimization is a very
challenging task due to diversity of objective functions
and complex real world optimization problems as they
may vary unimodel to multimodal, linear to highly nonlinear and irregularities [1].
The growing trend of apprehensive informatics is to use
swarm intelligence to search solutions to challenging
optimization problems and real-world applications. A
classical example is the evolution of particle swarm
optimization (PSO) that may be recognized as a
representative milestone in using swarm intelligence or
collective intelligence [2]. One more, good example is the
ant colony optimization algorithm which shows the
Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

collective intelligent behavior of social insects [3]. These
strategies are meta-heuristic and swarm-based, still they
share some common characteristics with genetic
algorithms [2], [4], [5], but these methods are much
simpler as they do not use mutation or crossover
operators. Genetic algorithms are population-based,
biology inspired algorithm, which was based on the
evolution theory and survival of the fittest [6]. Similarly,
PSO is also population-based, but it was inspired by the
intelligent behavior of swarm like fish and birds, and
therefore falls into the different class from genetic
algorithms. Swarm-based or population-based algorithms
fall in category of nature-inspired meta-heuristic
algorithms [7]-[11] with a great range of applications
areas [12]-[17]. Since the inception of swarm intelligence
strategies such as PSO in the early 1990s, more than a
dozen of new meta-heuristic algorithms have been
developed [18]-[29], and these algorithms have been
applied to almost every field of optimization, engineering,
design, image, scheduling, data mining, machine
intelligence etc.
The intelligent foraging behavior, learning capability,
memorizing power and information sharing properties of
honey bees have recently been one of the most interesting
research areas in swarm intelligence. Research and
studies on honey bees are setting a new trend in the
literature during the last decade [30]. Artificial bee colony
(ABC) algorithm was proposed by D. Karaboga in 2005
[31]. It is an optimization algorithm based on particular
intelligent behavior of honey bee swarms. Since its
inception it has been modified and compared with other
meta-heuristics like genetic algorithm, particle swarm
optimization (PSO), differential evolution (DE), and
evolutionary algorithms[32], [33] on standard benchmark
functions. It also has been used for designing of digital
IIR filters [34], for training of feed forward neural
network [35], to solve the leaf-constrained minimum
spanning tree problem [36], for optimization of
distribution network configuration[37], For optimization
of truss structure [38] and for inverse analysis of
structural parameter [39].
The rest of the paper is organized as follow: section 2
discuss original ABC algorithm in detail. Next section
contains introduction to Memetic algorithms. Section 4
outlines proposed algorithm followed by experimental
setup, results and discussion. Section 6 contains
conclusions followed by references.
Page 52

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856
2. ARTIFICIAL BEE COLONY ALGORITHM
Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) Algorithm is inspired by the
intuitive food foraging behavior of honey bee insects.
Honey bee swarm is one of the most insightful insect
exists in nature; it shows collective intelligent behavior
while searching the food. The honey bee swarm has a
number of good features like bees can interchange the
information, can remember the environmental conditions,
can store and share the information and take decisions
based these observations. According to changes in the
environment, the honey bee swarm updates itself, allocate
the tasks actively and proceed further by social learning
and teaching. This intelligent behavior of honey bees
inspires researchers and scientists to simulate the
intelligent food foraging behavior of the honey bee
swarm.
2.1 Analogy of Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm with
Bee
The algorithm suggested by D. Karaboga [31] is
collection of three major elements: employed bees,
unemployed bees and food sources. The employed bees
are associated with a good quality food source. Employed
bees have good knowledge about existing food source.
Exploitation of food sources completed by employed bees.
When a food source rejected employed bee turn to be as
unemployed. The idle foragers are bees acquiring no
information about food sources and searching for a new
food source to accomplish it. Unemployed bees can be
classified in two categories: scout bees and onlooker bees.
Scout bees randomly search for new food sources
neighboring the hive. Onlooker bees monitor the waggle
dance in hive, in order to select a food source for the
purpose of exploitation. The third element is the good
food sources nearby the beehive.
Comparatively in the optimization context, the number of
food sources (that is the employed or onlooker bees) in
ABC algorithm, is commensurate to the number of
solutions in the population. Moreover, the location of a
food source indicates the position of an encouraging
solution to the optimization problem, after all the virtue
of nectar of a food source represents the fitness cost
(quality) of the correlated solution.
2.2 Phases of Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm
The search process of ABC has three major steps [31]:
 Send the employed bees to a food source and estimate
their nectar quality;
 Onlooker bees select the food sources based on
information collected from employed bees and estimate
their nectar quality;
 Determine the scout bees and employ them on possible
food sources for exploitation.
The position of the food sources are arbitrarily selected by
the bees at the initial stage and their nectar qualities are
measured. The employed bees then communicate the
Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

nectar information of the sources with the onlooker bees
waiting at the dance area within the hive. After
exchanging this information, each employed bee returns
to the food source checked during the previous cycle, as
the position of the food source had been recalled and then
selects new food source using its perceived information in
the neighborhood of the present food source. In the last
phase, an onlooker bee uses the information retrieved
from the employed bees at the dance area to select a good
food source. The chances for the food sources to be
elected boosts with boost in its quality of nectar. Hence,
the employed bee with information of a food source with
the highest quality of nectar employs the onlookers to that
food source. It eventually chooses another food source
close by the one presently in her memory depending on
perceived information. A new food source is arbitrarily
generated by a scout bee to replace the one abandoned by
the onlooker bees. This complete search process of ABC
algorithm could be outlined in Fig. 1 as follows [31]:

Figure 1: Phases of Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm
2.2.1 Initialization of Swarm
The ABC algorithm has three main parameters: the
number of food sources (population), the number of
attempt after which a food source is treated to be jilted
(limit) and the criteria for termination (maximum number
of cycle). In the initial ABC proposed by D. Karaboga
[31], initial population (SN) divided in two equal parts
(employed bees (SN/2) or onlooker bees (SN/2)); the
number of food sources was equal to the employed bees
(SN/2). Initially it consider an evenly dealt swarm of food
sources (SN), where each food source xi (i = 1, 2 ...SN) is
a vector of D-dimension. Each food source is evaluated
using following method [40]:
(1)
xij  x min j  rand [0,1]( x max j  x min j )
Where
Page 53

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856
 rand[0,1] is a function that arbitrarily generates an
evenly distributed random number in range
[0,1].
2.2.2 Employed Bee
Employed bees phase modify the existing solution
according to information of individual experiences and
the fitness value of the newly raised solution. New food
source with higher fitness value take over the existing
one. The position of ith candidate in jth dimension updated
during this phase as shown below [40]:

vij  xij   ( xij  xkj )
(2)
Where


 ( xij  xkj ) is known as step size, k ∈ {1, 2, ...,
SN}, j ∈ {1, 2, ...,D} are two randomly chosen
indices. k ≠i ensure that step size has some
indicative improvement.

2.2.3 Onlooker Bee
The number of food sources for onlooker bee is same as
the employed. All along this phase all employed bee
exchange fitness information about new food sources with
onlooker bees. Onlooker bees estimate the probability of
selection for each food source generated by the employed
bee. The onlooker bee select best fittest food source. There
may be some other methods for calculation of probability,
but it is required to include fitness. In this paper
probability of each food source is decided using its fitness
as follow [40]:

Pij 

fiti
 fiti
SN

(3)

i 1

2.2.4 Scout Bee Phase
If the location of a food source is not modified for a
predefined number of evaluations, then the food source is
assumed to be neglected and scout bees phase is
initialized. All along this phase the bee associated with
the neglected food source converted into scout bee and the
food source is replaced by the arbitrarily chosen food
source inside the search space. In ABC, the pretended
number of cycles plays an important role in form of
control parameter which is called limit for rejection of
food sources. Now the scout bees replace the abandoned
food source with new one using following equation [40].

xij  x min j  rand [0,1]( x max j  x min j )
(4)
Based on the above description, it is clear that in ABC
search process there are three main control parameters:
the number of food sources SN, the limit and the
maximum number of cycles. The steps of ABC algorithm
are outlined as follow [40]:
Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

Algorithm 1: Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm
Initialize all parameters;
Repeat while Termination criteria is not fulfilled
Step 1: Employed bee phase for calculating new food
sources.
Step 2: Onlooker bees phase for updating location the
food sources based on their amount of nectar.
Step 3: Scout bee phase in order to search new food
sources in place of rejected food sources.
Step 4: Remember the best food source identified so far.
End of while
Output the best solution found so far.

3. MEMETIC ALGORITHMS
Memetic Algorithms (MAs) was the name introduced by
P.A. Moscato [41] to a class of stochastic global search
techniques that, commonly speaking, combine within the
framework of Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs) the benefits
of problem-specific local search heuristics and multiagent systems. In ethnic advancement processes,
information is processed and magnified by the
communicating parts, it is not only transmitted unaltered
between entities. This enhancement is realized in MAs by
assimilating heuristics, approximation algorithms,
metaheuristics, local search techniques, particular
recombination operators, truncated exact search methods,
etc. In aspect, almost all MAs can be illustrate as a search
technique in which a population of optimizing operator
co-operate and contest. MAs have been successfully
enforced to a wide range of domains that envelop
problems in combinatorial optimization, like E. Burke, J.
Newall, R. Weare [42] applied memetic algorithm for
university exam timetabling. R. Carr, W. Hart, N.
Krasnogor, E. Burke, J. Hirst, J. Smith [43] used a
memetic evolutionary algorithm for alignment of protein
structures. R. Cheng, M. Gen [44] scheduled parallel
machine using memetic algorithms. C. Fleurent, J.
Ferland [45] developed a graph coloring algorithm with
hybridization of Genetic algorithm. It is also applied for
travelling salesman problem [46], back routing in
telecommunication [47], bin packing [48], VLSI floor
planning [49] continuous optimization [50],[51], dynamic
optimization [52], multi-objective optimization [53].
Memetic Algorithm play an important role in
evolutionary computing as it provide better exploitation
capability of search space in local search. Application
area of memetic algorithms continuously expending after
its inception. Y. Wang et al [54] developed a memetic
algorithm for the maximum diversity problem based on
tabu search. X. Xue et al [55] Optimize ontology
alignment with help of Memetic Algorithm based on
partial reference alignment. O. Chertov and Dan Tavrov
[56] proposed a memetic algorithm for solution of the
Page 54

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856
task of providing group anonymity. J. C. Bansal et al [57]
incorporated Memetic search in artificial bee colony
algorithm. F. Kang et al [58] developed a new memetic
algorithm HJABC. I. Fister et al [59] proposed a memetic
artificial bee colony algorithm for large-scale global
optimization.
Memetic algorithm proposed by Kang et al. [58]
incorporates Hooke Jeeves [60] local search method in
Artificial Bee Colony algorithm. HJABC is an algorithm
with intensification search based on the Hooke Jeeves
pattern search and the ABC. In the HJABC, two
modification are proposed, one is the fitness (Fiti)
calculation function of basic ABC is changed and
calculated by equation (5) and another is that a HookeJeeves local search is incorporated with the basic ABC.

fiti  2  SP 

2( SP 1)(

pi 1)

( NP 1)

(5)

Here pi is the position of the solution in the whole
population after ranking, SP
[1.0, 2.0] is the selection
pressure. A medium value of SP = 1.5 can be a good
choice and NP is the number of solutions.
HJABC contains iterations of exploratory move and
pattern move to search optimum result of problem.
Exploratory move consider one variable at a time in order
to decide appropriate direction of search. The next step is
pattern search to speed up search in decided direction by
exploratory move. These two steps repeated until the
termination criteria meet. The Hooke-Jeeves pattern move
is a contentious attempt of the algorithms for the
exploitation of promising search directions as it collect
information from previous successful search iteration.
Algorithm 2 outlines major steps of HJABC [58].

The MeABC algorithm proposed by J. C. Bansal et al
[57] inspired by Golden Section Search (GSS) [61]. In
MeABC only the best particle of the current swarm
updates itself in its proximity. Original GSS method does
not use any gradient information of the function to finds
the optima of a uni-modal continuous function. GSS
processes the interval [a = −1.2, b = 1.2] and initiates two
intermediate points:
F1 = b − (b − a) × ψ,
F2 = a + (b − a) × ψ,

(6)
(7)

Here ψ = 0.618 is the golden ratio.
The MeABC contains four steps:
 employed bee phase,
 onlooker bee phase,
 scout bee phase and
 memetic search phase
First three steps are similar to the original ABC [31]
except updating of position of an individual. It updates
position as per the following equation.

x 'ij  xij  ij ( xij  xkj )  ij ( xbestj  xij )
(8)
Where Ѱij is a random number in interval [0, C], here C
is a positive constant. The detailed working of the
MeABC [57] explained in Algorithm 3.
Algorithm 3: MeABC Algorithm
Initialize the parameters.
Repeat while termination criteria meet
Step I: Produce new solutions for the employed bees
Step II: Produce the new solutions for the onlookers
from the solutions selected depending on pi and
evaluate them.
Step III: Determine the abandoned solution for the
scout, if exists, and replace it with a new randomly
produced solution.
Step IV: Memorize the best solution achieved so far.
Phase V: Apply Memetic search as given by [57]

4. RANDOMIZED MEMETIC ARTIFICIAL BEE
COLONY ALGORITHM
J. C. Bansal, H. Sharma and S. S. Jadon [17] indicate
some drawbacks of population based stochastic
algorithms. It is observed that the early convergence or
stagnation occurs in ABC. The position update in ABC
takes place with help of equation
(9)
vij  xij   ( xij  xkj )
After a certain number of iterations, normally all probable
solutions work within a very small neighborhood. In this
case the variation xij − xkj becomes very small and so the
enhancement in the position becomes inconsequential.
This event is known as the stagnation or premature
convergence if the global optimal solution is not present
Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

Page 55

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856
in this small neighborhood. Any population based
algorithm is observed as an adequate algorithm if it is
swift in convergence and able to explore the large area of
the search space. Especially, if a population based
stochastic algorithm is able to balance between
exploration and exploitation of the search space, then the
algorithm is regarded an adequate algorithm. From this
point of view, original ABC is not an efficient algorithm
[40].
D. Karaboga and B. Akay [40] analyzed the distinct
variants of ABC for global optimization and conclude
that ABC shows a poor performance and remains
incompetent in exploring the search space. The problem
of early convergence and stagnation is a matter of severe
consideration for evolution a relatively more efficient
ABC algorithm. The proposed randomized memetic ABC
introduce two new control parameters in memetic search
phase.
The proposed RMABC contains four phases. First three
phases: employed bee phase, onlooker bee phase and
scout bee phase are similar to original MeABC [57].
During fourth phase (memetic search phase), it introduce
two new parameters in order to strengthen local search
process. Golden section search [61] process controls the
step size during updating of best individual in current
swarm. In RMABC the GSS processes the interval [a = 1.2, b = 1.2] and generate two intermediate points:
f1 = ɸ1*(b - (b-a) * Ѱ)
(10)
f2 = ɸ2*(a + (b-a) * Ѱ)
(11)
Where
 ɸ1 is a positive constant in interval [0, 1],
 ɸ2 is a Negative constant in interval [-1, 0] and
 ψ = 0.618 is the golden ratio.
Opposite sign of ɸ1 and ɸ2 make it convenient to explore
local search space. Randomly generated value of ɸ1 and ɸ2
in specified range avoid stagnation and premature
convergence. The proposed population based stochastic
algorithm tries to balance between intensification and
diversification of the large search space. It arbitrarily
navigates almost complete search space during local
search phase and inching ahead towards global optimum.
In RMABC only the best solution of the current
population modify itself in its proximity. Here position
update process also modified as shown in equation (8).
This modified memetic search phase applied after scout
bee phase of original ABC not during local search phase.
Algorithm 4 outlines RMABC in detail with description
of each step. The symbol and parameters all are taken as
it was in original memetic artificial bee colony algorithm
[57].

Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

Table 1: Test Problems

Page 56

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856
5. Experimental results and discussion
5.1 Test problems under consideration
In order to analyze the performance of RMABC, 9
different global optimization problems (f1 to f9) are
selected (listed in Table 1). These are continuous
optimization problems and have different degrees of
complexity and multimodality. Test problems f1 –f8 are
taken from [62] and test problems f9 is taken from [63]
with the associated offset values.

 The stopping touchstone is either maximum number
of function evaluations (which is set to be 200000)
is reached or the acceptable error (outlined in
Table 1) has been achieved,
 The number of simulations/run =100,
 Value of termination criteria in memetic search
phase is set to be ǫ = 0.01.
Parameter settings for the algorithms ABC, MeABC,
GABC, BSFABC, HJABC and MABC are similar to their
original research papers.

5.2 Experimental setting
To prove the efficiency of RMABC, it is compared with 5.3 Results Comparison
ABC and recent variants of ABC named MeABC [57], Numerical results of RMABC with experimental setting
Gbestguided ABC (GABC) [64], Best-So-Far ABC as per subsection 5.2 are outlined in Table 2. Table 2
(BSFABC) [65], HJABC [58] and Modified ABC show the comparison of results based on standard
(MABC) [66]. To test Randomized memetic ABC deviation (SD), mean error (ME), average function
(RMABC) over considered problems, following evaluations (AFE) and success rate (SR) are reported.
Table 2 shows that most of the time RMABC outperforms
experimental setting is adopted:
in terms of efficiency (with less number of function
 Colony size NP = 50 [57],
evaluations) and accuracy as compare to other considered
 ɸij = rand[−1, 1],
algorithms.
 Number of food sources SN = NP/2,
 limit = 1500 [57],
Table 2: Comparison of the results of test problems

Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

Page 57

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856

x2 [0.6;3], x3 [0.207;0.5]granularity0.001

3
3

x

ME

AFE

SR

RMABC

4.21E-04

4.88E-04

38052.31

99

MeABC
ABC
HJABC
GABC

2.37E-03
1.17E-02
1.53E-03
9.50E-03

1.71E-03
1.36E-02
1.17E-03
8.64E-03

123440.3
187602.32
109737.22
189543.56

62
10
70
11

BSFABC
MABC

3.08E-03
6.59E-03

3.02E-02
5.28E-03

200031.13
181705.01

0
15

Average Function Evaluation

BC
AB
HJ C
AB
C
GA
B
BS C
FA
BC
M
AB
C

AB

C

250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0

Figure 2: Comparison of AFE for function f1
15000
10000

And four constraints

8c f Fmax x2

SD

20000

x1 {1, 2,3,................,70}granularity1

5000

 S  0, g 2 : l f  lmax  0

Where:

x3
x
c f  1  0.75
 0.615 3
x2  x3
x2
F
Fmax  1000, S  189000, l f  max  1.05( x1  2) x3
K

BC
AB
C
M

BC

FA

BS

C

C

GA

AB

HJ

AB

BC

eA

0

M

K

AB

g 3 :  p   pm  0, g 4 :  w 

C

0

Fm ax  Fp

RM

g1 :

Algorithm

eA

Optimization Problem
To see the robustness of the proposed strategy, a well
known engineering optimization problems, namely,
Compression Spring [67] [68] is solved. The considered
engineering optimization problem is described as follows:
6.1 Compression Spring
The considered engineering optimization application is
compression spring problem [48], [56]. This problem
minimizes the weight of a compression spring, subject to
constraints of minimum bending, prune stress, deluge
frequency, and limits on outside diameter and on design
variables. There are three important design variables: the
diameter of wire x1 , the diameter of the mean coil x2 , and
the count of active coils x3. Here it is presented in
simplified manner. The mathematical formulation of this
problem is outlined below:

Table 3: Comparison of the results of Compression
spring problem (f10)

M

6. Applications of RMABC to Engineering

The best known solution is (7, 1.386599591, 0.292),
which gives the fitness value f =2.6254. Acceptable error
for compression spring problem is 1.0E-04.

RM

Some more intensive analyses based on performance
indices have been carried out for results of ABC and its
variants in figure 2 to 8. Table 4 proves that the proposed
method is superior to others considered algorithms. The
proposed RMABC algorithm drastically reduces number
of function evaluation for al problems. Entries shown in
bold font in table 2 represents improved solutions. The
proposed algorithm sometimes reduces number of AFE
upto 40%. Here except function f2, each time it improves
in terms of AFE.

Figure 3: Comparison of AFE for function f3
30000
25000
20000
15000

lmax  14,  p 

Fp

,  pm  6, Fp  300
K
x4
K  11.5 106 3 3 ,  w  1.25
8 x1 x2

And the function to be minimized is

f10 ( X )   2

x2 x32 ( x1  2)
4

Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

10000
5000
0
RM

C
C
AB eAB
M

AB

C

C
C
C
C
AB
AB GAB FAB
M
HJ
S
B

Figure 4: Comparison of AFE for function f4
Page 58

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856

30000

250000

25000

200000

20000

150000

15000

100000

10000

50000

5000

0

0
C
C
AB eAB
RM M

C
C
AB eAB
M
M
R

C
C
C
C
C
AB JAB GAB FAB AB
M
H
BS

C
AB

C
C
C
C
AB
AB GAB FAB
M
HJ
BS

Figure 8: Comparison of AFE for function f10

Figure 5: Comparison of AFE for function f5

7. CONCLUSION

60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
C
C
AB eAB
RM M

AB

C

A
HJ

BC

BC
BC
BC
GA SFA MA
B

Figure 6: Comparison of AFE for function f6

200000
150000
100000

Here in this paper, two new parameters, ɸ1 and ɸ2 are
introduced in memetic search phase of MeABC. Value of
these parameters is arbitrarily chosen every time so
obtained modified MeABC is named as Randomized
Memetic ABC (RMABC). During its memetic search
phase, Golden Section Search method is used for
generating the new solutions nearby the best solution.
Due to newly introduced parameter (ɸ1 and ɸ2) new
solutions are evolved in the proximity the best solution.
Further, the modified strategy is also applied to the recent
variants of ABC, namely, GABC, HJABC, BSFABC and
MABC. With the help of experiments over test problems
and a well known engineering optimization application, it
is shown that the inclusion of the proposed strategy in the
memetic ABC improves the reliability, efficiency and
accuracy as compare to their original version. Table 4
show that the proposed RMABC is able solves almost all
the considered problems.

50000
0
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
AB eAB AB JAB GAB FAB AB
M
H
RM M
BS

Figure 7: Comparison of AFE for function f9
Table 4: Summary of table 2 and 3 outcome
Function

f1
f2
f3
f4
f5
f6
f7
f8
f9
f10
Total number of +
sign

RMABC Vs
MeABC

RMABC Vs
ABC

RMABC
HJABC

Vs

RMABC
GABC

Vs

RMABC
BSFABC

Vs

RMABC
MABC

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

9

10

10

10

10

10

Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

Vs

Page 59

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856
References
[1] Georgieva and I. Jordanov, “Global optimization
based on novel heuristics, low-discrepancy sequences
and genetic algorithms,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 196,
pp. 413–422, 2009.
[2] J. Kennedy and R.C. Eberhart, “Particle swarm
optimization,” in: Proc. of IEEE International
Conference on Neural Networks, Piscataway, NJ. pp.
1942-1948, 1995.
[3] M. Dorigo, “Optimization, Learning and Natural
Algorithms,” PhD thesis, Politecnico di Milano,
Italy, 1992.
[4] W.J. Bell, “Searching Behaviour: The Behavioural
Ecology of Finding Resources,” Chapman & Hall,
London, 1991.
[5] A.P. Engelbrecht, “Fundamentals of Computational
Swarm Intelligence,” Wiley, 2005.
[6] J. Holland, “Adaptation in Natural and Artificial
systems,” University of Michigan Press, Ann Anbor,
1975.
[7] C. Blum and A. Roli, “Metaheuristics in
combinatorial
optimization:
Overview
and
conceptural comparison,” ACM Comput. Surv., 35,
268-308, 2003.
[8] E.G. Talbi, Metaheuristics: From Design to
Implementation, Wiley, 2009.
[9] X.S.
Yang,
Nature-Inspired
Metaheuristic
Algorithms, Luniver Press, 2008.
[10] X.S. Yang and S.Deb, “Engineering optimization by
cuckoo search,” Int. J. Math. Modelling & Num.
Optimization, 1, 330-343, 2010.
[11] X.S. Yang, “A new metaheuristic bat-inspired
algorithm,” in: Nature Inspired Cooperative
Strategies for Optimization. (Eds. J. R. Gonzalez et
al.), Springer, SCI 284, 65-74 (2010b).
[12] A. Ayesh, “Swarm-based emotion modelling,“ Int. J.
Bio-Inspired Computation, 118-124, 2009.
[13] R. Gross and M. Dorigo, “Towards group transport
by swarms of robots,” Int. J. Bio-Inspired
Computation, 1, 1-13, 2009.
[14] J. Kennedy, R.C. Eberhart, Swarm intelligence,
Academic Press, 2001.
[15] S. Kumar, V.K. Sharma, and R. Kumari. "A Novel
Hybrid Crossover based Artificial Bee Colony
Algorithm for Optimization Problem." International
Journal of Computer Applications 82, 2013.
[16] S. Pandey and S. Kumar "Enhanced Artificial Bee
Colony Algorithm and It’s Application to Travelling
Salesman Problem." HCTL Open International
Journal of Technology Innovations and Research,
Volume 2, 2013:137-146.
[17] J.C. Bansal, H. Sharma and S.S. Jadon "Artificial bee
colony algorithm: a survey." International Journal of
Advanced Intelligence Paradigms 5.1 (2013): 123159.
Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

[18] S. Das, A. Abraham, U.K. Chakraborty, and A.
Konar, “Differential evolution using a neighborhoodbased mutation operator.” Evolutionary Computation,
IEEE Transactions on, 13(3):526–553, 2009.
[19] R.C. Eberhart, Y. Shi, and J. Kennedy. Swarm
intelligence. Elsevier, 2001.
[20] D.B.
Fogel.
“Introduction
to evolutionary
computation,” Evolutionary Computation: Basic
algorithms and operators, 1:1, 2000.
[21] L.J. Fogel, A.J. Owens, and M.J. Walsh. Artificial
intelligence through simulated evolution. 1966.
[22] J.R. Koza. Genetic programming: A paradigm for
genetically breeding populations of computer
programs to solve problems. Citeseer, 1990.
[23] M.G.H. Omran, A.P. Engelbrecht, and A. Salman.
“Differential evolution methods for unsupervised
image classification.” In Evolutionary Computation,
2005. The 2005 IEEE Congress on, volume 2, pages
966–973. IEEE, 2005.
[24] A. Ozturk, S. Cobanli, P. Erdogmus, and S. Tosun.
“Reactive power optimization with artificial bee
colony algorithm.” Scientific Research and Essays,
5(19):2848–2857, 2010.
[25] K.V. Price, R.M. Storn, and J.A. Lampinen.
“Differential evolution: a practical approach to global
optimization,” Springer Verlag, 2005.
[26] AK Qin, VL Huang, and PN Suganthan. Differential
evolution algorithm with strategy adaptation for
global
numerical
optimization.
Evolutionary
Computation, IEEE Transactions on, 13(2):398–417,
2009.
[27] I. Rechenberg. Cybernetic solution path of an
experimental problem. Royal aircraft establishment,
library translation 1122, 1965. reprinted in
evolutionary computationthe fossil record, db fogel,
ed., chap. 8, pp297-309, 1998.
[28] T. Rogalsky, S. Kocabiyik, and RW Derksen.
Differential evolution in aerodynamic optimization.
Canadian Aeronautics and Space Journal, 46(4):183–
190, 2000.
[29] R. Storn and K. Price. Differential evolution-a simple
and efficient adaptive scheme for global optimization
over continuous spaces. International computer
science institute - publications - TR, 1995.
[30] A. Baykasoglu, L. Ozbakir, and P. Tapkan,
“Artificial bee colony algorithm and its application to
generalized assignment problem,” In Swarm
Intelligence, Focus on Ant and Particle Swarm
Optimization, ITech Education and Publishing,
Vienna, Austria, pp. 113–144, 2007.
[31] D.Karaboga, “An idea based on bee swarm for
numerical optimization,” Tech. Rep. TR-06, Erciyes
University，Engineering
Faculty，Computer
Engineering Department, 2005.

Page 60

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856
[32] D. Karaboga and B. Basturk. “A powerful and
efficient algorithm for numerical function
optimization: artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm,”
J. Global Optim., vol. 39, pp. 459–471, 2007.
[33] D. Karaboga and B. Basturk. “On the performance of
artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm,” Appl. Soft
Comput., vol. 8, pp. 687–697, 2008.
[34] N. Karaboga, “A new design method based on
artificial bee colony algorithm for digital IIR filters,”
J. Franklin I., vol. 346, pp. 328–348, May 2009.
[35] D. Karaboga, B. Akay, and C. Ozturk. "Artificial bee
colony (ABC) optimization algorithm for training
feed-forward neural networks." Modeling decisions
for artificial intelligence. Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
2007. 318-329.
[36] A. Singh, “An artificial bee colony algorithm for the
leafconstrained minimum spanning tree problem,”
Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 9, pp. 625–631, March
2009.
[37] R. S. Rao, S. V. L. Narasimham, and M.
Ramalingaraju. "Optimization of distribution
network configuration for loss reduction using
artificial bee colony algorithm." International Journal
of Electrical Power and Energy Systems Engineering
1.2 (2008): 116-122.
[38] M. Sonmez, "Artificial bee colony algorithm for
optimization of truss structures." Applied Soft
Computing 11.2 (2011): 2406-2418.
[39] F. Kang, J. Li, and Q. Xu, “Structural inverse
analysis by hybrid simplex artificial bee colony
algorithms,” Comput. Struct., vol. 87, pp. 861-870,
July 2009.
[40] D. Karaboga and B. Akay, “A comparative study of
artificial
bee
colony
algorithm”.
Applied
Mathematics and Computation, 214(1):108–132,
2009.
[41] P. Moscato, “On evolution, search, optimization,
genetic algorithms and martial arts: Towards
memetic algorithms.” Tech. Rep. Caltech Concurrent
Computation Program, Report. 826, California Inst.
of Tech., Pasadena, California, USA (1989).
[42] E. Burke, J. Newall, R. Weare.: A memetic algorithm
for university exam timetabling. In: E. Burke, P.
Ross (eds.) The Practice and Theory of Automated
Timetabling, Lecture Notes in Computer Science,
vol. 1153, pp. 241–250. Springer Verlag (1996).
[43] R. Carr, W. Hart, N. Krasnogor, E. Burke, J. Hirst, J.
Smith, ”Alignment of protein structures with a
memetic evolutionary algorithm,” In: Proceedings of
the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation
Conference. Morgan Kaufman (2002).
[44] R. Cheng, M. Gen, “Parallel machine scheduling
problems using memetic algorithms.” Computers &
Industrial Engineering 33(3–4), 761–764 (1997).
Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

[45] C. Fleurent, J. Ferland, “Genetic and hybrid
algorithms for graph coloring.” Annals of Operations
Research 63, 437–461 (1997).
[46] G. Gutin, D. Karapetyan, N. Krasnogor, “Memetic
algorithm for the generalized asymmetric traveling
salesman problem.” In: M. Pavone, G. Nicosia, D.
Pelta, N. Krasnogor (eds.) Proceedings of the
2007Workshop On Nature Inspired Cooperative
Strategies for Optimisation. Lecture Notes in
Computer Science (LNCS), vol. to appear. Springer
(2007)
[47] L. He, N. Mort, “Hybrid genetic algorithms for
telecomunications network back-up routeing.” BT
Technology Journal 18(4) (2000)
[48] C. Reeves, “Hybrid genetic algorithms for binpacking and related problems.” Annals of Operations
Research 63, 371–396 (1996)
[49] M. Tang, X. Yao, “A memetic algorithm for VLSI
floorplanning.” Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part
B, IEEE Transactions on 37(1), 62–69 (2007). DOI
10.1109/TSMCB.2006.883268.
[50] W. E. Hart, “Adaptive Global Optimization with
Local Search.” Ph.D. Thesis, University of
California, San Diego (1994)
[51] G. M. Morris,D. S. Goodsell,R. S. Halliday, R. Huey,
W. E. Hart, R. K. Belew, A. J. Olson,: “Automated
docking using a lamarkian genetic algorithm and an
empirical binding free energy function.” J Comp
Chem 14, 1639–1662 (1998)
[52] H. Wang, D. Wang, and S. Yang. "A memetic
algorithm with adaptive hill climbing strategy for
dynamic optimization problems." Soft Computing
13.8-9 (2009): 763-780.
[53] D. Liu, K. C. Tan, C. K. Goh, W. K. Ho, “A multiobjective memetic algorithm based on particle swarm
optimization.” Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part
B, IEEE Transactions on 37(1), 42–50 (2007).
[54] Y Wang, JK Hao, F Glover, Z Lü, “A tabu search
based memetic algorithm for the maximum diversity
problem.” Engineering Applications of Artificial
Intelligence 27 (2014): 103-114.
[55] X. Xue, Y. Wang, and A. Ren. “Optimizing ontology
alignment through Memetic Algorithm based on
Partial Reference Alignment.” Expert Systems with
Applications 41.7 (2014): 3213-3222.
[56] O. Chertov and Dan Tavrov. "Memetic Algorithm for
Solving the Task of Providing Group Anonymity."
Advance Trends in Soft Computing. Springer
International Publishing, 2014. 281-292.
[57] J.C. Bansal, H. Sharma, K.V. Arya and A. Nagar,
“Memetic search in artificial bee colony algorithm.”
Soft Computing (2013): 1-18.
[58] F Kang, J Li, Z Ma, H Li , “Artificial bee colony
algorithm with local search for numerical
optimization.” Journal of Software 6.3 (2011): 490497.
Page 61

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)
Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com
Volume 3, Issue 1, January – February 2014
ISSN 2278-6856
[59] I. Fister, I. Fister Jr, J. Bres, V. Zumer. "Memetic
artificial bee colony algorithm for large-scale global
optimization." Evolutionary Computation (CEC),
2012 IEEE Congress on. IEEE, 2012.
[60] R. Hooke and T.A. Jeeves. “Direct search solution of
numerical and statistical problems.” Journal of the
ACM, 8(2):212–229, 1961.
[61] J. Kiefer, “Sequential minimax search for a
maximum.” In Proc. Amer. Math. Soc, volume 4,
pages 502–506, 1953.
[62] M.M. Ali, C. Khompatraporn, and Z.B. Zabinsky. “A
numerical evaluation of several stochastic algorithms
on selected continuous global optimization test
problems.” Journal of Global Optimization,
31(4):635–672, 2005.
[63] P.N. Suganthan, N. Hansen, J.J. Liang, K. Deb, YP
Chen, A. Auger, and S. Tiwari. “Problem definitions
and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2005 special
session on real-parameter optimization.” In CEC
2005, 2005.
[64] G. Zhu and S. Kwong, “Gbest-guided artificial bee
colony
algorithm
for
numerical
function
optimization.”
Applied
Mathematics
and
Computation, 217(7):3166–3173, 2010.
[65] A. Banharnsakun, T. Achalakul, and B.
Sirinaovakul, “The best-so-far selection in artificial
bee colony algorithm.” Applied Soft Computing,
11(2):2888–2901, 2011.
[66] B. Akay and D. Karaboga. “A modified artificial bee
colony algorithm for real-parameter optimization.”
Information Sciences, doi:10.1016/j.ins.2010.07.015,
2010.
[67] G.C. Onwubolu and B.V. Babu. “New optimization
techniques in engineering.” Springer Verlag, 2004.
[68] E. Sandgren, “Nonlinear integer and discrete
programming in mechanical design optimization.”
Journal of Mechanical Design, 112:223, 1990.

Volume 3, Issue 1 January – February 2014

Page 62

