Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
[Submitted on 19 Feb 2020 (v1), last revised 17 Apr 2024 (this version, v5)]
Title:Comprehensive Taxonomies of Nature- and Bio-inspired Optimization: Inspiration versus Algorithmic Behavior, Critical Analysis and Recommendations (from 2020 to 2024)
View PDF HTML (experimental)Abstract:In recent years, bio-inspired optimization methods, which mimic biological processes to solve complex problems, have gained popularity in recent literature. The proliferation of proposals prove the growing interest in this field. The increase in nature- and bio-inspired algorithms, applications, and guidelines highlights growing interest in this field. However, the exponential rise in the number of bio-inspired algorithms poses a challenge to the future trajectory of this research domain. Along the five versions of this document, the number of approaches grows incessantly, and where having a new biological description takes precedence over real problem-solving. This document presents two comprehensive taxonomies. One based on principles of biological similarity, and the other one based on operational aspects associated with the iteration of population models that initially have a biological inspiration. Therefore, these taxonomies enable researchers to categorize existing algorithmic developments into well-defined classes, considering two criteria: the source of inspiration, and the behavior exhibited by each algorithm. Using these taxonomies, we classify 518 algorithms based on nature-inspired and bio-inspired principles. Each algorithm within these categories is thoroughly examined, allowing for a critical synthesis of design trends and similarities, and identifying the most analogous classical algorithm for each proposal. From our analysis, we conclude that a poor relationship is often found between the natural inspiration of an algorithm and its behavior. Furthermore, similarities in terms of behavior between different algorithms are greater than what is claimed in their public disclosure: specifically, we show that more than one-fourth of the reviewed solvers are versions of classical algorithms. The conclusions from the analysis of the algorithms lead to several learned lessons.
Submission history
From: Daniel Molina Dr. [view email][v1] Wed, 19 Feb 2020 12:34:45 UTC (588 KB)
[v2] Thu, 20 Feb 2020 09:27:38 UTC (767 KB)
[v3] Fri, 30 Apr 2021 13:54:37 UTC (2,269 KB)
[v4] Sat, 7 May 2022 12:08:01 UTC (784 KB)
[v5] Wed, 17 Apr 2024 07:59:26 UTC (3,926 KB)
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.