Table 4.

The comparison results of the studied algorithms implemented on the test functions.

Function	Algorithm
		LSO [37]	SHO [38]	MVO [36]	ALO [31]	TEO	dTEO
f 1	Min	3.837e – 24	2.1201e – 28	−2.2800e – 27	3.3197e – 28	3.4511e – 28	8.2193e – 31
	Std	2.559e – 19	2.4937e – 27	4.0865e – 28	2.9938e – 29	2.0073e – 30	2.37928e – 32
f 2	Min	7.2874e – 5	7.564e – 4	4.824e – 4	2.56384e – 5	4.5463e – 6	6.7811e – 5
	Std	3.2084e – 6	4.18297e – 5	2.1167e – 5	3.5918e – 6	5.0648e – 7	2.1253e – 5
f 3	Min	−7.2553	−8.15754	−10.00	−7.19376	−10.00	−10.00
	Std	0.35	0.46	0.27	0.15	0.15	0.10
f 4	Min	−5.2846	−18.053	−17.1146	−16.3927	−18.1106	−18.1683
	Std	3.126	1.294	2.391	4.190	1.630	1.01
f 5	Min	11.46e – 10	2.597e – 16	2.18769e – 7	5.0913e – 9	2.8096e – 23	3.7938e – 22
	Std	8.942e – 11	4.0973e – 17	2.89430e – 8	6.5514e – 10	2.8897e – 25	7.1937e – 24
f 6	Min	4.276e – 11	2.1953e – 12	2.1967e – 21	3.1957e – 10	2.0054e – 18	5.6124e – 23
	Std	7.297e – 12	1.5374e – 14	4.2849e – 23	6.8091e – 11	2.3169e – 19	4.6498e – 24
f 7	Min	2.623e – 15	3.3733e – 10	5.0406e – 8	3.7628e – 13	3.6781e – 9	6.39482e – 17
	Std	1.167e – 16	4.1967e – 12	4.9364e – 9	3.1936e – 15	4.1945e – 10	2.22864e – 19
f 8	Min	0.0067	−0.1472	−0.3492	−0.5846	−0.5790	−0.5273
	Std	0.653	0.467	0.385	0.805	0.152	0.100