Composite Differential Search Algorithm

<table>Comparison of performance of six algorithms for minimization of <svg height="13.1824pt" id="M429" style="vertical-align:-3.53609pt" version="1.1" viewbox="0 -9.64631 16.2415 13.1824" width="16.2415pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.0135,0,0,-0.0135,0,0)"><path d="M619 670C619 686 593 712 555 712S459 686 410 634S335 504 320 430H250L219 400L222 388H312L258 73C223 -133 201 -166 187 -180C175 -191 158 -199 140 -199C123 -199 88 -188 74 -172C68 -166 63 -164 54 -171C38 -185 23 -201 23 -215C23 -236 60 -261 93 -261C122 -261 161 -247 207 -200C268 -138 300 -71 337 94C365 220 376 277 394 387L501 399L521 430H401C432 623 464 665 501 665C524 665 544 651 567 627C577 617 583 618 592 625C601 631 619 651 619 670Z" id="g113-103"></path><glyph.data ascent="3473" descent="-2876" horiz-adv-x="642" vert-adv-y="642"></glyph.data></g><g transform="matrix(.0095,0,0,-0.0095,7.004,3.264)"><path d="M245 635C92 635 37 457 37 312C37 149 91 -12 244 -12C395 -12 449 166 449 312C449 469 395 635 245 635ZM243 598C332 598 358 454 358 312C358 173 334 26 245 26C158 26 128 174 128 313S152 598 243 598Z" id="g50-49"></path><glyph.data ascent="3443" descent="-2856" horiz-adv-x="487" vert-adv-y="487"></glyph.data></g><g transform="matrix(.0095,0,0,-0.0095,11.623,3.264)"><path d="M389 0V32C297 38 291 46 291 118V635C234 613 175 595 109 583V556L161 554C203 552 207 547 207 497V118C207 46 201 38 110 32V0H389Z" id="g50-50"></path><glyph.data ascent="3443" descent="-2856" horiz-adv-x="487" vert-adv-y="487"></glyph.data></g></svg> with dimension 30.</table>

Journal of Applied Mathematics

Composite Differential Search Algorithm

Figure 2