This paper investigates the effect of adding three extensions to Central
Force Optimization when it is used as the Global Search and Optimization method
for the design and optimization of 6-elementYagi-Uda arrays. Those extensions are NegativeGravity, Elitism, and DynamicThresholdOptimization. The basic CFO heuristic does not include any
of these, but adding them substantially
improves the algorithm’s performance. This paper extends the work reported
in a previous paper that considered only negative gravity and which showed a significant performance improvement over
a range of optimized arrays. Still better results are obtained by adding
to the mix Elitism and DTO. An overall improvement in best
fitness of 19.16% is achieved by doing so. While the work reported here was
limited to the design/optimization of 6-element
Yagis, the reasonable inference based on these data is that any antenna
design/optimization problem, indeed any Global Search and Optimization problem, antenna or not, utilizing Central
Force Optimization as the Global Search and Optimization engine will
benefit by including all three extensions, probably substantially.
References
[1]
Formato, R.A. (2021) Six-Element Yagi Array Designs Using Central Force Optimization with Pseudo Random Negative Gravity. Wireless Engineering and Technology, 12, 23-51. https://doi.org/10.4236/wet.2021.123003
[2]
Luke, S. (2015) Essentials of Metaheuristics. 2nd Edition, Online Ver. 2.2, Oct. 2015, Sect. 3.3.1. https://cs.gmu.edu/~sean/book/metaheuristics/
[3]
Formato, R.A. (2012) Dynamic Threshold Optimization—A New Approach?
http://arXiv.org/abs/1206.0414
[4]
Formato, R.A. (2013) Issues in Antenna Optimization—A Monopole Case Study. ACES (Applied Computational Electromagnetics Society) Journal, 28, 1122-1133.
[5]
Formato, R.A. (2017) Determinism in Electromagnetic Design & Optimization— Part II: BBP-Derived π Fractions for Generating Uniformly Distributed Sampling Points in Global Search and Optimization Algorithms. Forum for Electromagnetic Research Methods and Application Technologies. Vol. 19, Article No. 10,
https://www.e-fermat.org
[6]
Formato, R.A. (2017) Determinism in Electromagnetic Design & Optimization— Part I: Central Force Optimization. FERMAT, Forum for Electromagnetic Research Methods and Application Technologies. Vol. 19, Article No. 9.
https://www.e-fermat.org
[7]
Dib, N., Sharaqa, A. and Formato, R.A. (2013) Variable Z0 Applied to the Optimal Design of Multi-Stub Matching Network and a Meander Monopole. International Journal of Microwave and Wireless Technologies, 6, 55-514.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1759078713001049
[8]
U.S. Patent No. 8776002. https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
[9]
Burke, G.J. (2011) Numerical Electromagnetics Code—NEC-4.2 Method of Moments, Part I: User’s Manual. LLNL-SM-490875, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (USA), Livermore, CA, 2011.
[10]
Wang, J. (2011) Particle Swarm Optimization with Adaptive Parameter Control and Opposition. Journal of Computational Information Systems, 7, 4463-4470
[11]
Formato, R.A. (2010) Parameter-Free Deterministic Global Search with Simplified Central Force Optimization. In: Huang, D.-S., Zhao, Z., Bevilacqua, V. and Figueroa, J.C., Eds., Advanced Intelligent Computing Theories and Applications (ICIC2010), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 309-318, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14922-1_39
[12]
Hayes, B. (2011) Quasirandom Ramblings. American Scientist, 99, 282-287.
https://doi.org/10.1511/2011.91.282
https://www.americanscientist.org/
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.365.4074&rep=rep1&type=pdf