Particle swarm optimization: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted
(Javascript: bugfix)
(=={{header|Racket}}== implementation added)
Line 297: Line 297:
f(-.54719,-1.54719)=-1.913222954882273
f(-.54719,-1.54719)=-1.913222954882273
and differs from published -1.9133</pre>
and differs from published -1.9133</pre>

=={{header|Racket}}==
<lang racket>#lang racket/base
(require racket/list racket/math)

(define (unbox-into-cycle s)
(if (box? s) (in-cycle (in-value (unbox s))) s))

;; Tries to "maximise" function > (so if you want a minimum, set #:> to <, IYSWIM)
(define (PSO f particles iterations hi lo #:ω ω #:φ_p φ_p #:φ_g φ_g #:> (>? >))
(define dimensions (procedure-arity f))
(unless (exact-nonnegative-integer? dimensions)
(raise-argument-error 'PSO "function of fixed arity" 1 f))
(define-values (x v)
(for/lists (x v)
((_ particles))
(for/lists (xi vi)
((d (in-range dimensions))
(h (unbox-into-cycle hi))
(l (unbox-into-cycle lo)))
(define h-l (- h l))
(values (+ l (* (random) h-l)) (+ (- h-l) (* 2 (random) h-l))))))
(define (particle-step x_i v_i p_i g)
(for/lists (x_i+ v_i+)
((x_id (in-list x_i))
(v_id (in-list v_i))
(p_id (in-list p_i))
(g_d (in-list g)))
(define v_id+ (+ (* ω v_id)
(* φ_p (random) (- p_id x_id))
(* φ_g (random) (- g_d x_id))))
(values (+ x_id v_id+) v_id+)))
(define (call-f args) (apply f args))
(define g0 (argmax call-f x))
(define-values (_X _V _P _P. G G.)
(for/fold ; because of g and g., we can't use for/lists
((X x) (V v) (P x) (P. (map call-f x)) (g g0) (g. (apply f g0)))
((_ iterations))
(for/fold
((x+ null) (v+ null) (p+ null) (p.+ null) (g+ g) (g.+ g.))
((x_i (in-list X))
(v_i (in-list V))
(p_i (in-list P))
(p._i (in-list P.)))
(define-values (x_i+ v_i+) (particle-step x_i v_i p_i g+))
(let* ((x._i+ (apply f x_i+))
(new-p_i? (>? x._i+ p._i))
(new-g? (>? x._i+ g.+)))
(values (cons x_i+ x+)
(cons v_i+ v+)
(cons (if new-p_i? x_i+ p_i) p+)
(cons (if new-p_i? x._i+ p._i) p.+)
(if new-g? x_i+ g+)
(if new-g? x._i+ g.+))))))
(values G G.))

(define (McCormick x1 x2)
(+ (sin (+ x1 x2)) (sqr (- x1 x2)) (* -1.5 x1) (* 2.5 x2) 1))

(define (Michalewitz d #:m (m 10))
(define 2m (* 2 m))
(define /pi (/ pi))
(define (f . xx)
(let Σ ((s 0) (i 1) (xx xx))
(if (null? xx)
(- s)
(let ((x (car xx)))
(Σ (+ s (* (sin x) (expt (sin (* i (sqr x) /pi)) 2m))) (+ i 1) (cdr xx))))))
(procedure-reduce-arity f d))

(displayln "McCormick [-1.993] @ (-0.54719, -1.54719)")
(PSO McCormick 1000 100 #(-1.5 -3) #(4 4) #:ω 0 #:φ_p 0.6 #:φ_g 0.3 #:> <)
(displayln "Michalewitz 2d [-1.8013] @ (2.20, 1.57)")
(PSO (Michalewitz 2) 1000 30 (box 0) (box pi) #:ω 0.3 #:φ_p 0.3 #:φ_g 0.3 #:> <)
(displayln "Michalewitz 5d [-4.687658]")
(PSO (Michalewitz 5) 1000 30 (box 0) (box pi) #:ω 0.3 #:φ_p 0.3 #:φ_g 0.3 #:> <)
(displayln "Michalewitz 10d [-9.66015]")
(PSO (Michalewitz 10) 1000 30 (box 0) (box pi) #:ω 0.3 #:φ_p 0.3 #:φ_g 0.3 #:> <)</lang>
{{out}}

Here is a sample run, the particles roll downhill quite nicely for McCormick,
but there's a lot of space to search with the 10-dimensional Michalewitz; so
YMMV with that one!

<pre>McCormick [-1.993] @ (-0.54719, -1.54719)
'(-0.5471975539492846 -1.547197548223612)
-1.9132229549810367
Michalewitz 2d [-1.8013] @ (2.20, 1.57)
'(2.20290527060906 1.5707963523178217)
-1.8013034100975123
Michalewitz 5d [-4.687658]
'(2.188617053067511
1.571283730996248
1.2884975345181757
1.9194689579781514
1.7202092563763838)
-4.680722049442259
Michalewitz 10d [-9.66015]
'(1.359756739301337
2.7216986742916007
1.2823734619604734
1.097509491839529
2.2225042675789752
0.9162856379217913
1.8753760783453128
0.7909979596555162
0.46574677476493
1.8558804696523914)
-6.432092623300999</pre>


=={{header|REXX}}==
=={{header|REXX}}==