A CUDA-Based Real Parameter Optimization
Benchmark
Ke Ding and Ying Tan

arXiv:1407.7737v1 [cs.NE] 29 Jul 2014

School of Electronics Engineering and Computer Science, Peking University

Abstract. Benchmarking is key for developing and comparing optimization algorithms. In this paper, a CUDA-based real parameter optimization benchmark (cuROB) is introduced. Test functions of diverse properties are included within cuROB and implemented efficiently with CUDA.
Speedup of one order of magnitude can be achieved in comparison with
CPU-based benchmark of CEC’14.
Key words: Optimization Methods, Optimization Benchmark, GPU,
CUDA.

1

Introduction

Proposed algorithms are usually tested on benchmark for comparing both performance and efficiency. However, as it can be a very tedious task to select and
implement test functions rigorously. Thanks to GPUs’ massive parallelism, a
GPU-based optimization function suit will be beneficial to test and compare
optimization algorithms.
Based on the well known CPU-based benchmarks presented in [1–3], we proposed a CUDA-based real parameter optimization test suit, called cuROB, targeting on GPUs. We think cuROB can be helpful for assessing GPU-based optimization algorithms, and hopefully, conventional CPU-based algorithms can
benefit from cuROB’s fast execution.
Considering the fact that research on the single objective optimization algorithms is the basis of the research on the more complex optimization algorithms
such as constrained optimization algorithms, multi-objective optimizations algorithms and so forth, in this first release of cuROB a suit of single objective
real-parameter optimization function are defined and implemented.
The test functions are selected according to the following criteria: 1) the
functions should be scalable in dimension so that algorithms can be tested under
various complexity; 2) the expressions of the functions should be with good
parallelism, thus efficient implementation is possible on GPUs; 3) the functions
should be comprehensible such that algorithm behaviours can be analysed in
the topological context; 4) last but most important, the test suit should cover
functions of various properties in order to get a systematic evaluation of the
optimization algorithms.
The source code and a sample can be download from code.google.com/p/curob/.

1.1

Symbol Conventions and Definitions

Symbols and definitions used in the report are described in the following. By
default, all vectors refer to column vectors, and are depicted by lowercase letter
and typeset in bold.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–

1.2

[·] indicates the nearest integer value
b·c indicates the largest integer less than or equal to
xi denotes i-th element of vector x
f (·), g(·) and G(·) multi-variable functions
fopt optimal (minimal) value of function f
xopt optimal solution vector, such that f (xopt ) = fopt
R normalized orthogonal matrix for rotation
D dimension
1 = (1, . . . , 1)T all one vector

General Setup

The general setup of the test suit is presented as follows.
– Dimensions The test suit is scalable in terms of dimension. Within the
hardware limit, any dimension D ≥ 2 works. However, to construct a real
hybrid function, D should be at least 10.
– Search Space All functions are defined and can be evaluated over RD ,
while the actual search domain is given as [−100, 100]D .
– fopt All functions, by definition, have a minimal value of 0, a bias (fopt )
can be added to each function. The selection can be arbitrary, fopt for each
function in the test suit is listed in Tab. 1.
– xopt The optimum point of each function is located at original. xopt which
is randomly distributed in [−70, 70]D , is selected as the new optimum.
– Rotation Matrix To derive non-separable functions from separable ones,
the search space is rotated by a normalized orthogonal matrix R. For a given
function in one dimension, a different R is used. Variables are divided into
three (almost) equal-sized subcomponents randomly. The rotation matrix for
each subcomponent is generated from standard normally distributed entries
by Gram-Schmidt orthonormalization. Then, these matrices consist of the
R actually used.

1.3

CUDA Interface and Implementation

A simple description of the interface and implementation is given in the following.
For detail, see the source code and the accompanied readme file.

Interface Only benchmark.h need to be included to access the test functions, and the CUDA file benchmark.cu need be compiled and linked. Before
the compiling start, two macro, DIM and MAX CONCURRENCY should be
modified accordingly. DIM defines the dimension of the test suit to used while
MAX CONCURRENCY controls the most function evaluations be invoked concurrently. As memory needed to be pre-allocated, limited by the hardware, don’t
set MAX CONCURRENCY greater than actually used.
Host interface function initialize () accomplish all initialization tasks, so must
be called before any test function can be evaluated. Allocated resource is released
by host interface function dispose ().
Both double precision and single precision are supported through func evaluate ()
and func evaluatef () respectively. Take note that device pointers should be
passed to these two functions. For the convenience of CPU code, C interfaces
are provided, with h func evaluate for double precision and h func evaluatef for
single precision. (In fact, they are just wrappers of the GPU interfaces.)
Efficiency Concerns When configuration of the suit, some should be taken
care for the sake of efficiency. It is better to evaluation a batch of vectors than
many smaller. Dimension is a fold of 32 (the warp size) can more efficient. For
example, dimension of 96 is much more efficient than 100, even though 100 is
little greater than 96.
1.4

Test Suite Summary

The test functions fall into four categories: unimodal functions, basic multimodal functions, hybrid functions and composition functions. The summary of
the suit is listed in Tab. 1. Detailed information of each function will given in
the following sections.

2

Speedup

Under different hardware, various speedups can be achieved. 30 functions are
the same as CEC’14 benchmark. We test the cuROB’s speedup with these 30
functions under the following settings: Windows 7 SP1 x64 running on Intel
i5-2310 CPU with NVIDIA 560 Ti, the CUDA version is 5.5. 50 evaluations
were performed concurrently and repeated 1000 runs. The evaluation data were
generated randomly from uniform distribution.
The speedups with respect to different dimension are listed by Tab. 2 (single
precision) and Tab. 3 (double precision). Notice that the corresponding dimensions of cuROB are 10, 32, 64 and 96 respectively and the numbers are as in
Tab. 1
Fig. 1 demonstrates the overall speedup for each dimension. On average,
cuROB is never slower than its CPU-base CEC’14 benchmark, and speedup of
one order of magnitude can be achieved when dimension is high. Single precision
is more efficient than double precision as far as execution time is concerned.

Table 1. Summary of cuROB’s Test Functions
No.

Functions

ID

Description
Optimum easy
to track

Rotated
Rotated
Rotated
Rotated
Rotated
Rotated
Rotated

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Rotated Step
STEP
Rotated Weierstrass
WEIERSTRASS
Rotated Griewank
GRIEWANK
Rastrigin
RARSTRIGIN U
Rotated Rastrigin
RARSTRIGIN
Rotated Schaffer’s F7
SCHAFFERSF7
Rotated Expanded Griewank plus Rosenbrock GRIE ROSEN
Rotated Rosenbrock
ROSENBROCK
Modified Schwefel
SCHWEFEL U
Rotated Modified Schwefel
SCHWEFEL
Rotated Katsuura
KATSUURA
Rotated Lunacek bi-Rastrigin
LUNACEK
Rotated Ackley
ACKLEY
Rotated HappyCat
HAPPYCAT
Rotated HGBat
HGBAT
Rotated Expanded Schaffer’s F6
SCHAFFERSF6

Hybrid
Functions

23
24
25
26
27
28

Hybrid
Hybrid
Hybrid
Hybrid
Hybrid
Hybrid

Composition
Functions

29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36

Composition
Composition
Composition
Composition
Composition
Composition
Composition
Composition

Unimodal
Functions

Basic
Multi-modal
Functions

Sphere
Ellipsoid
Elliptic
Discus
Bent Cigar
Different Powers
Sharp Valley

SPHERE
ELLIPSOID
ELLIPTIC
DISCUS
CIGAR
POWERS
SHARPV

0
1
2
3
4
5
6

Function
Function
Function
Function
Function
Function

1
2
3
4
5
6

Function
Function
Function
Function
Function
Function
Function
Function

HYBRID1
HYBRID2
HYBRID3
HYBRID4
HYBRID5
HYBRID6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Optimum hard
to track

With
adepuate
global
structure

With
weak
global
structure

With different
properties for
different variables
subcomponents

COMPOSITION1
COMPOSITION2 Properties similar
COMPOSITION3
to particular
COMPOSITION4
sub-function
COMPOSITION5 when approaching
COMPOSITION6 the corresponding
COMPOSITION7
optimum
COMPOSITION8

Search Space: [−100, 100]D , fopt = 100

Table 2. Speedup (single Precision)
D NO.3 NO.4 NO.5 NO.8 NO.9 NO.10 NO.11 NO.13 NO.14 NO.15
10 0.59 0.20
32 3.82 2.42
64 4.67 2.72
94 13.40 10.10

0.18
2.00
2.29
8.50

12.23 0.49
47.19 3.54
50.17 3.56
84.31 11.13

0.28
1.67
0.93
1.82

0.31
3.83
3.06
9.98

0.32
5.09
2.88
9.66

0.14
2.06
2.20
8.75

0.77
3.54
3.39
6.73

D NO.16 NO.17 NO.19 NO.20 NO.21 NO.22 NO.23 NO.24 NO.25 NO.26
10 0.80 3.25 0.36
32 5.57 10.04 3.46
64 5.45 13.19 3.27
96 14.38 23.68 11.32

0.20
1.22
2.10
8.26

0.26 0.45 0.63 0.44 2.80 0.52
1.42 6.44 3.95 3.43 11.47 3.36
2.27 3.81 4.62 3.07 14.17 3.34
8.49 11.60 13.67 10.64 30.11 10.71

D NO.27 NO.28 NO.29 NO.30 NO.31 NO.32 NO.33 NO.34 NO.35 NO.36
10 0.65 0.72
32 2.73 3.09
64 3.86 4.01
96 12.04 11.32

0.70
3.63
3.21
8.15

0.55
3.10
2.67
6.27

0.71 3.49 3.50
4.10 12.39 12.51
3.38 12.68 12.63
8.49 23.67 23.64

0.84 1.28
5.25 5.19
3.80 5.27
9.50 11.79

0.70
3.33
3.13
7.93

Table 3. Speedup (Double Precision)
D NO.3 NO.4 NO.5 NO.8 NO.9 NO.10 NO.11 NO.13 NO.14 NO.15
10 0.56
32 3.78
64 4.34
96 12.27

0.19
2.43
2.49
9.24

0.17 9.04
1.80 33.37
1.93 30.82
6.95 46.01

0.43
3.09
3.15
9.72

0.26
1.59
0.92
1.78

0.29
3.52
2.87
9.62

0.30
4.81
2.74
8.74

0.14
1.97
2.11
7.87

0.75
3.53
3.29
5.92

D NO.16 NO.17 NO.19 NO.20 NO.21 NO.22 NO.23 NO.24 NO.25 NO.26
10 0.79 2.32
32 5.10 6.79
64 4.75 8.29
96 11.91 13.81

0.34
3.28
3.06
9.75

0.18
1.13
1.99
7.37

0.26 0.45 0.59
1.29 6.10 3.63
2.18 3.32 4.02
7.78 10.24 11.55

0.43 1.97
3.14 8.15
2.77 9.80
9.57 20.81

0.52
3.23
2.92
9.40

D NO.27 NO.28 NO.29 NO.30 NO.31 NO.32 NO.33 NO.34 NO.35 NO.36
10 0.79 2.32
32 5.10 6.79
64 4.75 8.29
96 11.91 13.81

0.34
3.28
3.06
9.75

0.18
1.13
1.99
7.37

0.26 0.45 0.59
1.29 6.10 3.63
2.18 3.32 4.02
7.78 10.24 11.55

0.43 1.97
3.14 8.15
2.77 9.80
9.57 20.81

0.52
3.23
2.92
9.40

Fig. 1. Overall Speedup

3
3.1

Unimodal Functions
Shifted and Rotated Sphere Function
f1 (x) =

D
X

z2i + fopt

(1)

i=1

where z = R(x − xopt ).
Properties
– Unimodal
– Non-separable
– Highly symmetric, in particular rotationally invariant
3.2

Shifted and Rotated Ellipsoid Function
f4 (x) =

D
X
i=1

where z = R(x − xopt ).
Properties
– Unimodal
– Non-separable

i · z2i + fopt

(2)

3.3

Shifted and Rotated High Conditioned Elliptic Function
f2 (x) =

D
X

i−1

(106 ) D−1 z2i + fopt

(3)

i=1

where z = R(x − xopt ).
Properties
–
–
–
–
3.4

Unimodal
Non-separable
Quadratic ill-conditioned
Smooth local irregularities
Shifted and Rotated Discus Function
f5 (x) = 106 · z21 +

D
X

z2i + fopt

(4)

i=2

where z = R(x − xopt ).
Properties
–
–
–
–
3.5

Unimodal
Non-separable
Smooth local irregularities
With One sensitive direction
Shifted and Rotated Bent Cigar Function
f6 (x) =

z21

6

+ 10 ·

D
X

z2i + fopt

(5)

i=2

where z = R(x − xopt ).
Properties
– Unimodal
– Non-separable
– Optimum located in a smooth but very narrow valley
3.6

Shifted and Rotated Different Powers Function
v
uD
uX
i−1
f (x) = t
|z |2+4 D−1 + f
4

i

i=1

where z = R(0.01(x − xopt )).

opt

(6)

Properties
– Unimodal
– Non-separable
– Sensitivities of the zi -variables are different
3.7

Shifted and Rotated Sharp Valley Function
v
uD
uX
2
f4 (x) = zi + 100 · t
z2i + fopt

(7)

i=2

where z = R(x − xopt ).
Properties
– Unimodal
– Non-separable
– Global optimum located in a sharp (non-differentiable) ridge

4
4.1

Basic Multi-modal Functions
Shifted and Rotated Step Function
D
X
bzi + 0.5c2 + fopt
f3 (x) =

(8)

i=1

where z = R(x − xopt )
Properties
– Many Plateaus of different sizes
– Non-separable
4.2

Shifted and Rotated Weierstrass Function
!
kX
kX
D
max
max
X
f9 (x) =
ak cos (2πbk (zi + 0.5)) −D·
ak cos (2πbk ·0.5)+fopt (9)
i=1

k=0

k=0

where a = 0.5, b = 3, kmax = 20, z = R(0.005 · (x − xopt )).
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– Continuous everywhere but only differentiable on a set of points

4.3

Shifted and Rotated Griewank Function
f10 (x) =

D
D
X
Y
z2i
zi
−
cos( √ ) + 1 + fopt
4000
i
i=1
i=1

(10)

where z = R(6 · (x − xopt )).
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– With many regularly distributed local optima
4.4

Shifted Rastrigin Function
f11 (x) =

D
X


z2i − 10 cos(2πzi ) + 10 · D + fopt

(11)

i=1

where z = 0.0512 · (x − xopt ).
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Separable
– With many regularly distributed local optima
4.5

Shifted and Rotated Rastrigin Function
f12 (x) =

D
X


z2i − 10 cos(2πzi ) + 10 + fopt

(12)

i=1

where z = R(0.0512 · (x − xopt )).
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– With many regularly distributed local optima
4.6

Shifted Rotated Schaffer’s F7 Function
f17 (x) =

where wi =

q

D−1
√ 
1 X
(1 + sin2 (50 · wi0.2 )) · wi
D − 1 i=1

z2i + z2i+1 , z = R(x − xopt ).

!2
+ fopt

(13)

Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
4.7

Expanded Griewank plus Rosenbrock Function
Rosenbrock Function: g2 (x, y) = 100(x2 − y)2 + (x − 1)2
Griewank Function: g3 (x) = x2 /4000 − cos(x) + 1
f18 (x) =

D−1
X

g3 (g2 (zi , zi+1 )) + g3 (g2 (zD , z1 )) + fopt

(14)

i=1

where z = R(0.05 · (x − xopt )) + 1.
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
–
4.8

Shifted and Rotated Rosenbrock Function
f7 (x) =

D−1
X


100 · (z2i − zi+1 )2 + (zi − 1)2 + fopt

(15)

i=1

where z = R(0.02048 · (x − xopt )) + 1.
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– With a long, narrow, parabolic shaped flat valley from local optima to global
optima
4.9

Shifted Modified Schwefel Function

f13 (x) = 418.9829 × D −

D
X

g1 (wi ),

wi = zi + 420.9687462275036 (16)

i=1


p
wi · sin( |wi |)


p


2
i −500)
500 − mod(wi , 500) − (w10000D
g1 (wi ) = (500 − mod(wi , 500)) · sin




(mod(−w , 500) − 500) · sin p500 − mod(−w , 500) − (wi +500)2
i

i

10000D

(17)
where z = 10 · (x − xopt ).

if |wi | ≤ 500
if wi > 500
if wi < −500

Properties
– Multi-modal
– Separable
– Having many local optima with the second better local optima far from the
global optima
4.10

Shifted Rotated Modified Schwefel Function

f14 (x) = 418.9829 × D −

D
X

g1 (wi ),

wi = zi + 420.9687462275036 (18)

i=1

where z = R(10 · (x − xopt )) and g1 (·) is defined as Eq. 17.
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– Having many local optima with the second better local optima far from the
global optima
4.11

Shifted Rotated Katsuura Function
32
D
X
|2j · zi − [2j · zi ]| 10
10
10 Y
(1 + i
) D1.2 − 2 + fopt
f15 (x) = 2
j
D i=1
2
D
j=1

(19)

where z = R(0.05 · (x − xopt )).
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– Continuous everywhere but differentiable nowhere
4.12

Shifted and Rotated Lunacek bi-Rastrigin Function
!
D
D
D
X
X
X
f12 (x) = min
(zi − µ1 )2 , dD + s
(zi − µ2 )2 ) +10·(D−
cos(2π(zi −µ1 )))+fopt
i=1

i=1

i=1

(20)
where z = R(0.1 · (x − xopt ) + 2.5 ∗ 1), µ1 = 2.5, µ2 = −2.5, d = 1, s = 0.9.
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– With two funnel around µ1 1 and µ2 1

4.13

Shifted and Rotated Ackley Function
v


!
u
D
D
u1 X
X
1
t
f8 (x) = −20 · exp −0.2
x2  − exp
cos(2πxi ) + 20 + e + fopt
D i=1 i
D i=1
(21)
where z = R(x − xopt ).
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– Having many local optima with the global optima located in a very small
basin
4.14

Shifted Rotated HappyCat Function
f16 (x) = |

D
X

z2i − D|0.25 + (

i=1

D
D
1X 2 X
zj )/D + 0.5 + fopt
zj +
2 j=1
j=1

(22)

where z = R(0.05 · (x − xopt )) − 1.
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– Global optima located in curved narrow valley
4.15

Shifted Rotated HGBat Function
D
D
D
D
X
X
1X 2 X
f17 (x) = |(
z2i )2 − (
zj )2 |0.5 + (
zj +
zj )/D + 0.5 + fopt
2 j=1
i=1
j=1
j=1

(23)

where z = R(0.05 · (x − xopt )) − 1.
Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable
– Global optima located in curved narrow valley
4.16

Expanded Schaffer’s F6 Function
p
sin2 ( x2 + y 2 ) − 0.5
Schaffer’s F6 Function: g4 (x, y) =
+ 0.5
(1 + 0.001 · (x2 + y 2 ))2
f19 (x) =

D−1
X
i=1

where z = R(x − xopt ).

g4 (zi , zi+1 ) + g4 (zD , z1 ) + fopt

(24)

Properties
– Multi-modal
– Non-separable

5

Hybrid Functions

Hybrid functions are constructed according to [3]. For each hybrid function, the
variables are randomly divided into subcomponents and different basic functions
(unimodal and multi-modal) are used for different subcomponents, as depicted
by Eq. 25.
N
X
F (x) =
Gi (Ri · zi ) + f opt
(25)
i=1

where F (·) is the constructed hybrid function and Gi (·) is the i-th basic function
used, N is the number of basic functions. zi is constructed as follows.
y
z1
z2
zN

= x − xopt
= [yS1 , yS2 , . . . , ySn1 ]
= [ySn1 +1 , ySn1 +2 · · · ySn1 +n2 ]
..
.
= [yS PN −1
, yS PN −1
, . . . , ySnD ]
(

i=1

ni )+1

(

i=1

ni )+2

where S is a permutation of (1 : D), such that z = [z1 , z2 , . . . , zN ] forms the
transformed vector and ni , i = 1, . . . , N are the dimensions of the basic functions,
which is derived as Eq. 26.
ni = dpi De(i = 1, 2, · · · , N − 1), nN = D −

N
−1
X
i=1

pi is used to control the percentage of each basic functions.
5.1
–
–
–
–
–

Hybrid Function 1
N =3
p = [0.3, 0.3, 0.4]
G1 : Modified Schwefel’s Function
G2 : Rastrigin Function
G3 : High Conditioned Elliptic Function

5.2

Hybrid Function 2

–
–
–
–
–

N =5
p = [0.3, 0.3, 0.4]
G1 : Bent Cigar Function
G2 : HGBat Function
G3 : Rastrigin Function

ni

(26)

5.3
–
–
–
–
–
–
5.4
–
–
–
–
–
–
5.5
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
5.6
–
–
–
–
–
–
–

6

Hybrid Function 3
N =4
p = [0.2, 0.2, 0.3, 0.3]
G1 : Griewank Function
G2 : Weierstrass Function
G3 : Rosenbrock Function
G4 : Expanded Scaffer’s F6 Function
Hybrid Function 4
N =4
p = [0.2, 0.2, 0.3, 0.3]
G1 : HGBat Function
G2 : Discus Function
G3 : Expanded Griewank plus Rosenbrock Function
G4 : Rastrigin Function
Hybrid Function 5
N =5
p = [0.1, 0.2, 0.2, 0.2, 0.3]
G1 : Expanded Scaffer’s F6 Function
G2 : HGBat Function
G3 : Rosenbrock Function
G4 : Modified Schwefel’s Function
G5 : High Conditioned Elliptic Function
Hybrid Function 6
N =5
p = [0.1, 0.2, 0.2, 0.2, 0.3]
G1 : Katsuura Function
G2 : HappyCat Function
G3 : Expanded Griewank plus Rosenbrock Function
G4 : Modified Schwefel’s Function
G5 : Ackley Function

Composition Functions

Composition functions are constructed in the same manner as in [2, 3].
F (x) =

N
X
i=1

[ωi ∗ (λ · Gi (x) + biasi )] + f opt

(27)

–
–
–
–
–
–
–

F (·): the constructed composition function
Gi (·): i-th basic function
N : number of basic functions used
biasi : define which optimum is the global optimum
σi : control Gi (·)’s coverage range, a small σi gives a narrow range for Gi (·)
λi : control Gi (·)’s height
ωi : weighted value for Gi (·), calculated as follows:
PD
opt,i 2
)
1
j=1 (xj − xj
exp(−
)
(28)
wi = qP
2
D
opt,i 2
2Dσ
i
)
j=1 (xj − xj
where xopt,i represents the optimum position for Gi (·). Then normalized wi
PN
to get ωi : ωi = wi / i=1 w
(i .
1 j=i
When x = xopt,i , ωj =
(j = 1, 2, · · · , N ), such that F (x) =
0 j 6= i
biasi + f opt,i .

The constructed functions are multi-modal and non-separable and merge
the properties of the sub-functions better and maintains continuity around the
global/local optima. The local optimum which has the smallest bias value is the
global optimum. The optimum of the third basic function is set to the origin as
a trip in order to test the algorithms’ tendency to converge to the search center.
Note that, the landscape is not only changes along with the selection of basic
function, but the optima and σ and λ can effect it greatly.
6.1
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–

Composition Function 1
N =5
σ = [10, 20, 30, 40, 50]
λ = [1e − 10, 1e − 6, 1e − 26, 1e − 6, 1e − 6]
bias = [0, 100, 200, 300, 400]
G1 : Rotated Rosenbrock Function
G2 : High Conditioned Elliptic Function
G3 : Rotated Bent Cigar Function
G4 : Rotated Discus Function
G5 : High Conditioned Elliptic Function

6.2

Composition Function 2

–
–
–
–
–
–
–

N =3
σ = [15, 15, 15]
λ = [1, 1, 1]
bias = [0, 100, 200]
G1 : Expanded Schwefel Function
G2 : Rotated Rstrigin Function
G3 : Rotated HGBat Function

6.3
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
6.4
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
6.5
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
6.6
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–

Composition Function 3
N =3
σ = [20, 50, 40]
λ = [0.25, 1, 1e − 7]
bias = [0, 100, 200]
G1 : Rotated Schwefel Function
G2 : Rotated Rastrigin Function
G3 : Rotated High Conditioned Elliptic Function
Composition Function 4
N =5
σ = [20, 15, 10, 10, 40]
λ = [2.5e − 2, 0.1, 1e − 8, 0.25, 1]
bias = [0, 100, 200, 300, 400]
G1 : Rotated Schwefel Function
G2 : Rotated HappyCat Function
G3 : Rotated High Conditioned Elliptic Function
G4 : Rotated Weierstrass Function
G5 : Rotated Griewank Function
Composition Function 5
N =5
σ = [15, 15, 15, 15, 15]
λ = [10, 10, 2.5, 2.5, 1e − 6]
bias = [0, 100, 200, 300, 400]
G1 : Rotated HGBat Function
G2 : Rotated Rastrigin Function
G5 : Rotated Schwefel Function
G4 : Rotated Weierstrass Function
G3 : Rotated High Conditioned Elliptic Function
Composition Function 6
N =5
σ = [10, 20, 30, 40, 50]
λ = [2.5, 10, 2.5, 5e − 4, 1e − 6]
bias = [0, 100, 200, 300, 400]
G1 : Rotated Expanded Griewank plus Rosenbrock Function
G2 : Rotated HappyCat Function
G3 : Rotated Schwefel Function
G4 : Rotated Expanded Scaffer’s F6 Function
G5 : High Conditioned Elliptic Function

6.7
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
6.8
–
–
–
–
–
–
–

Composition Function 7
N =3
σ = [10, 30, 50]
λ = [1, 1, 1]
bias = [0, 100, 200]
G1 : Hybrid Function 1
G2 : Hybrid Function 2
G3 : Hybrid Function 3
Composition Function 8
N =3
σ = [10, 30, 50]
λ = [1, 1, 1]
bias = [0, 100, 200]
G1 : Hybrid Function 4
G2 : Hybrid Function 5
G3 : Hybrid Function 6

References
1. Finck, S., Hansen, N., Ros, R., Auger, A.: Real-parameter black-box optimization benchmarking 2010: Noiseless functions definitions. Technical Report 2009/20,
Research Center PPE (2010)
2. Liang, J.J., Qu, B.Y., Suganthan, P.N., Hernández-Dı́az, A.G.: Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the cec 2013 special session and competition on
real-parameter optimization. Technical Report 201212, Computational Intelligence
Laboratory, Zhengzhou University and Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
(2013)
3. Liang, J.J., Qu, B.Y., Suganthan, P.N.: Problem definitions and evaluation criteria
for the cec 2014 special session and competition on single objective real-parameter
numerical optimization. Technical Report 201311, Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Zhengzhou University and Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
(2013)

Appendices
A

Figures for 2-D Functions

Fig. 2. Sphere Function

Fig. 3. Ellipsoid Function

Fig. 4. Elliptic Function

Fig. 5. Discus Function

Fig. 6. Bent Cigar Function

Fig. 7. Different Powers Function

Fig. 8. Sharp Valley Function

Fig. 9. Step Function

Fig. 10. Weierstrass Function

Fig. 11. Weierstrass Function

Fig. 12. Rastrigin Function

Fig. 13. Rotated Rastrigin Function

Fig. 14. Schaffer’s F7 Function

Fig. 15. Expanded Griewank Rosenbrock Function

Fig. 16. Rosenbrock Function

Fig. 17. Schwefel Function

Fig. 18. Rotated Schwefel Function

Fig. 19. Katsuura Function

Fig. 20. Lunacek Function

Fig. 21. Ackley Function

Fig. 22. HappyCat Function

Fig. 23. HGBat Function

Fig. 24. Expanded Scaffers’ F6 Function

Fig. 25. Composition Function 1

Fig. 26. Composition Function 2

Fig. 27. Composition Function 3

Fig. 28. Composition Function 4

Fig. 29. Composition Function 5

Fig. 30. Composition Function 6

