Research Article
Adaptive Bacterial Foraging Optimization
Table 4
Comparison among ABFO0, ABFO1, BFO, PSO, and GA on 10-D problems.
| | 10-D | BFO | ABFO0 | ABFO1 | PSO | GA |
| | Best | 0.0131 | 4.6730e–059 | 5.0821e–071 | 9.7085e–052 | 9.2242e–004 | | Worst | 0.0456 | 2.3559e–053 | 1.3038e–066 | 1.1714e–045 | 0.0654 | | f 1 | Mean | 0.0325 | 1.2647e–054 | 9.3583e–068 | 7.6021e–047 | 0.0133 | | Std | 0.0086 | 4.3424e–054 | 2.5360e–067 | 2.2319e–046 | 0.0149 | | Rank | 5 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| | Best | 7.8436 | 0.1645 | 0.3620 | 0.4578 | 6.6031 | | Worst | 11.3192 | 0.5903 | 4.3232 | 5.2075 | 10.1496 | | f 2 | Mean | 9.8819 | 0.3492 | 1.8660 | 0.8852 | 8.5506 | | Std | 1.0079 | 0.0966 | 1.8064 | 1.0667 | 0.7340 | | Rank | 5 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
| | Best | 17.2125 | 1.1011 | 5.9785 | 2.9849 | 1.0413 | | Worst | 29.0473 | 9.0694 | 32.0221 | 17.9092 | 12.3464 | | f 3 | Mean | 22.6397 | 4.8844 | 15.5429 | 10.8119 | 6.0909 | | Std | 3.1330 | 1.6419 | 8.4543 | 3.8555 | 2.9628 | | Rank | 5 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 2 |
| | Best | 39.0662 | 0 | 0.0910 | 52.3209 | 0.1405 | | Worst | 133.2687 | 0.1328 | 0.7516 | 133.6037 | 0.9791 | | f 4 | Mean | 88.7932 | 0.0647 | 0.3551 | 100.0376 | 0.4061 | | Std | 25.0455 | 0.0308 | 0.1605 | 17.2171 | 0.1875 | | Rank | 4 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 3 |
| | Average rank | 4.75 | 1.25 | 2.5 | 3.25 | 3.25 | | Final rank | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 |
|
|
