First of all I apologize for my strong word to you. I am very sorry. Yes your coding is very useful to me. Before you write I have already taken the ConstrBoundaryas soft instead of penalize and became successful. Thank you very much.
It is very sad that you have not replied my query till yet.Again I am facing another problem with your code which I am explaining.
I am getting the fitness function from a simulink file. The simulink file will run if the variables lie within lower bound and upper bound.But with your code sometimes the variables exceed the lower bound or upper bound so that the simulink file is not able to execute and it shows error.So please help me as soon as possible. Thanks.
I have to optimize 16 parameters. Out of which the first nine parameters are in the range of zero to one but the rest seven variables are in the range of one to four (only integers).So please help me to use your codings. Is your coding is useful for mixed integer constraints?Again is it useful for 16 variables?
Anticipating a quick reply.Thanking you.
Hi Sam. Thanks for this great function. I have found a small bug I believe. If I try to find the lowest value of a 1/x function between 1 and 10:
it returns x = 1. When I set the bound to 1.01 and 10:
the lowest value is found at x = 10.
Hi Sam, thank you for the toolbox! I have tried to modify the code in order to get a multiobjective optimizer, by means of a adaptive weighted sum approach for the fitness. How can I write the code, in order to write out the Pareto points? I wrote for each generation k
% if trypareto
But it does not work well as it writes out equal points.Does anyone have any suggestion? thank you all.
hi, Sam. I am right now using PSO as a tool to minimize my fitness function. Actually i am using binary coding for the fitness function which i have already run it with GA previously, and it works fine. However, when i am using your binary PSO to calculate the same function, it best value in each generation is like random values, no patterns like gradually going down or at least sign of minimizing. I am wondering why is this happening. The binary coding fine for my case, cause it work well in GA. Will you be so kind to answer me this question, or i will post the details if you need to fix my trouble. Hope to get your reply soon.
I think I found a crucial bug (version 20130702): in my program I write down the test parameters if they fit better than in the iterations before. In my test PSO stopped after fulfilling a break condition and gave me a final parameter set, which fitted less than an intermediate result I wrote down before.