Composite Differential Search Algorithm

<table>Comparison of performance of six algorithms for minimization of <svg height="13.1824pt" id="M440" 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="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><g transform="matrix(.0095,0,0,-0.0095,11.623,3.264)"><path d="M158 548H390L417 615L410 623H122L83 318C105 326 143 337 185 337C296 337 350 275 350 188C350 116 308 42 225 42C164 42 122 74 100 93C90 101 82 99 72 92C60 82 51 68 50 59C48 46 52 38 66 24C82 9 125 -12 172 -12C225 -11 292 15 346 59C408 108 437 166 437 226C437 309 371 397 242 397C214 397 170 382 133 369L158 548Z" id="g50-54"></path><glyph.data ascent="3443" descent="-2856" horiz-adv-x="487" vert-adv-y="487"></glyph.data></g></svg> with fixed dimension.</table>

Journal of Applied Mathematics

Composite Differential Search Algorithm

Figure 13