Particle swarm optimization: Velocity initialization

Since its birth in 1995, particle swarm optimization (PSO) has been well studied and successfully applied. While a better understanding of PSO and particle behaviors have been obtained through theoretical and empirical analysis, some issues about the beavior of particles remain unanswered. One such issue is how velocities should be initialized. Though zero initial velocities have been advocated, a popular initialization strategy is to set initial weights to random values within the domain of the optimization problem. This article first illustrates that particles tend to leave the boundaries of the search space irrespective of the initialization approach, resulting in wasted search effort. It is also shown that random initialization increases the number of roaming particles, and that this has a negative impact on convergence time. It is also shown that enforcing a boundary constraint on personal best positions does not help much to address this problem. The main objective of the article is to show that the best approach is to initialize particles to zero, or random values close to zero, without imposing a personal best bound.

[1]  Rolf Wanka,et al.  Theoretical Analysis of Initial Particle Swarm Behavior , 2008, PPSN.

[2]  Chilukuri K. Mohan,et al.  Analysis of a simple particle swarm optimization system , 1998 .

[3]  Andries Petrus Engelbrecht,et al.  A study of particle swarm optimization particle trajectories , 2006, Inf. Sci..

[4]  Millie Pant,et al.  A Simple Diversity Guided Particle Swarm Optimization , 2007, 2007 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Russell C. Eberhart,et al.  Parameter Selection in Particle Swarm Optimization , 1998, Evolutionary Programming.

[6]  Zhiyong Li,et al.  A Novel Diversity Guided Particle Swarm Multi-objective Optimization Algorithm , 2011 .

[7]  Tim Hendtlass,et al.  Preserving Diversity in Particle Swarm Optimisation , 2003, IEA/AIE.

[8]  Jacques Riget,et al.  A Diversity-Guided Particle Swarm Optimizer - the ARPSO , 2002 .

[9]  R. Eberhart,et al.  Comparing inertia weights and constriction factors in particle swarm optimization , 2000, Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC00 (Cat. No.00TH8512).

[10]  Andries Petrus Engelbrecht,et al.  Heterogeneous particle swarms in dynamic environments , 2011, 2011 IEEE Symposium on Swarm Intelligence.

[11]  Wenbo Xu,et al.  A Quantum-Behaved Particle Swarm Optimization With Diversity-Guided Mutation for the Design of Two-Dimensional IIR Digital Filters , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs.

[12]  Maurice Clerc,et al.  The particle swarm - explosion, stability, and convergence in a multidimensional complex space , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[13]  Russell C. Eberhart,et al.  A new optimizer using particle swarm theory , 1995, MHS'95. Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro Machine and Human Science.

[14]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  Particle swarm optimization , 1995, Swarm Intelligence.

[15]  Andries P. Engelbrecht,et al.  Effects of swarm size on Cooperative Particle Swarm Optimisers , 2001 .

[16]  Ioan Cristian Trelea,et al.  The particle swarm optimization algorithm: convergence analysis and parameter selection , 2003, Inf. Process. Lett..

[17]  Yue Shi,et al.  A modified particle swarm optimizer , 1998, 1998 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation Proceedings. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence (Cat. No.98TH8360).

[18]  James Kennedy,et al.  Small worlds and mega-minds: effects of neighborhood topology on particle swarm performance , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406).

[19]  Peter J. Bentley,et al.  Dynamic Search With Charged Swarms , 2002, GECCO.