Skip to main content
. 2022 Mar 24:1–52. Online ahead of print. doi: 10.1007/s00366-021-01591-5

Table 21.

Comparative observations of ICHIMP-SHO for three-bar truss optimisation design issue with other algorithms

Comparative algorithms Optimal values for variables Optimum weight
X1 X2

Proposed

ICHIMP-SHO

0.788595 0.408486 263.89701
Hernandez 0.788 0.408 263.9
Ray and Saini [150] 0.795 0.398 264.3
Gandomi [151] 0.78867 0.40902 263.9716
EEGWO [76] 0.790761722154339 0.402632303723429 2.6392442078878771E+02
GWO-SA [152] 0.789 0.408 263.896
WDE [76] 0.515535107819326 0.0156341500434795 2.639297829829848E+02
ALO 0.789 0.408 263.896
CS [153] 0.789 0.409 263.972
hHHO-SCA [75] 0.788498 0.40875 263.8958665
DEDS [154] 0.789 0.408 263.896
CSA [155] 0.788638976 0.408350573 263.895844337
MBA [151] 0.789 0.409 263.896
Ray and Liew [156] 0.788621037 0.408401334 263.8958466
Raj et al. 0.789764410 0.405176050 263.89671