Table 3.
The performance analysis of the comparative algorithms applied to studied standard benchmarks.
| Algorithm | BBO [36] | LS [37] | EPO [38] | SHO [39] | TEO | MTEO | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Function | |||||||
| f 1 | Min | 2.615e-25 | 1.1100e-29 | -3.2688e-26 | 2.3086e-27 | 2.4400e-30 | 9.2082e-32 |
| Std | 1.448e-20 | 3.3826e-28 | 4.0754e-27 | 1.8827e-28 | 1.0062e-32 | 3.2681e-33 | |
|
| |||||||
| f 2 | Min | 6.0652e-4 | 8.3420e-3 | 5.6024e-3 | 1.4527e-4 | 2.4352e-5 | 7.6700e-5 |
| Std | 4.1073e-5 | 3.0718e-4 | 1.0056e-4 | 2.4807e-5 | 3.0537e-6 | 1.0142e-5 | |
|
| |||||||
| f 3 | Min | -6.1442 | -9.0464 | -9.86 | -8.0826 | -9.86 | -9.86 |
| Std | 0.31 | 0.42 | 0.23 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.06 | |
|
| |||||||
| f 4 | Min | -6.1735 | -17.020 | -16.0035 | -15.2816 | -17.0095 | -17.0572 |
| Std | 3.015 | 1.183 | 2.280 | 4.089 | 1.520 | 0.980 | |
|
| |||||||
| f 5 | Min | 12.35e-10 | 1.486e-15 | 3.0765e-8 | 4.0802e-8 | 1.7085e-22 | 2.6827e-23 |
| Std | 7.831e-11 | 3.0862e-16 | 1.1832e-9 | 5.4403e-9 | 3.7786e-24 | 6.0826e-25 | |
|
| |||||||
| f 6 | Min | 5.165e-10 | 3.1842e-11 | 1.0856e-20 | 1.0846e-9 | 3.0008e-20 | 4.5013e-22 |
| Std | 8.186e-11 | 2.4253e-13 | 5.1738e-22 | 4.7080e-11 | 1.2058e-21 | 2.5387e-23 | |
|
| |||||||
| f 7 | Min | 3.512e-14 | 2.2621e-9 | 4.0305e-8 | 2.6517e-10 | 1.5670e-9 | 7.2837e-16 |
| Std | 1.056e-15 | 3.0856e-11 | 3.8253e-9 | 2.1825e-12 | 2.0834e-10 | 3.1175e-18 | |
|
| |||||||
| f 8 | Min | 0.0056 | -0.1361 | -0.2381 | -0.4735 | -0.4680 | -0.4162 |
| Std | 0.542 | 0.356 | 0.274 | 0.704 | 0.141 | 0.089 | |