A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction
New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, eng...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Tzanetos, Alexandros [verfasserIn] Blondin, Maude [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2022 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Engineering applications of artificial intelligence - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1988, 118 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:118 |
DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
ELV008997616 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | ELV008997616 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230524152202.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230510s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)ELV008997616 | ||
035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0952-1976(22)00511-5 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 004 |q DE-600 |
084 | |a 50.23 |2 bkl | ||
084 | |a 54.72 |2 bkl | ||
100 | 1 | |a Tzanetos, Alexandros |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-1319-513X |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction |
264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Qualitative systematic review | |
650 | 4 | |a Metaheuristics | |
650 | 4 | |a Engineering optimization problem | |
650 | 4 | |a Benchmarking | |
700 | 1 | |a Blondin, Maude |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0001-7844-8874 |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Engineering applications of artificial intelligence |d Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1988 |g 118 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)308447832 |w (DE-600)1502275-4 |w (DE-576)094752524 |x 0952-1976 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:118 |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2056 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
936 | b | k | |a 50.23 |j Regelungstechnik |j Steuerungstechnik |
936 | b | k | |a 54.72 |j Künstliche Intelligenz |
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 118 |
author_variant |
a t at m b mb |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:09521976:2022----::qaiaieytmtceiwfeaersisplettninopesosrndsgpolmurnstai |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2022 |
bklnumber |
50.23 54.72 |
publishDate |
2022 |
allfields |
10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521 doi (DE-627)ELV008997616 (ELSEVIER)S0952-1976(22)00511-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 004 DE-600 50.23 bkl 54.72 bkl Tzanetos, Alexandros verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1319-513X aut A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction 2022 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions. Qualitative systematic review Metaheuristics Engineering optimization problem Benchmarking Blondin, Maude verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-7844-8874 aut Enthalten in Engineering applications of artificial intelligence Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1988 118 Online-Ressource (DE-627)308447832 (DE-600)1502275-4 (DE-576)094752524 0952-1976 nnns volume:118 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz AR 118 |
spelling |
10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521 doi (DE-627)ELV008997616 (ELSEVIER)S0952-1976(22)00511-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 004 DE-600 50.23 bkl 54.72 bkl Tzanetos, Alexandros verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1319-513X aut A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction 2022 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions. Qualitative systematic review Metaheuristics Engineering optimization problem Benchmarking Blondin, Maude verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-7844-8874 aut Enthalten in Engineering applications of artificial intelligence Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1988 118 Online-Ressource (DE-627)308447832 (DE-600)1502275-4 (DE-576)094752524 0952-1976 nnns volume:118 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz AR 118 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521 doi (DE-627)ELV008997616 (ELSEVIER)S0952-1976(22)00511-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 004 DE-600 50.23 bkl 54.72 bkl Tzanetos, Alexandros verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1319-513X aut A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction 2022 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions. Qualitative systematic review Metaheuristics Engineering optimization problem Benchmarking Blondin, Maude verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-7844-8874 aut Enthalten in Engineering applications of artificial intelligence Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1988 118 Online-Ressource (DE-627)308447832 (DE-600)1502275-4 (DE-576)094752524 0952-1976 nnns volume:118 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz AR 118 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521 doi (DE-627)ELV008997616 (ELSEVIER)S0952-1976(22)00511-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 004 DE-600 50.23 bkl 54.72 bkl Tzanetos, Alexandros verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1319-513X aut A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction 2022 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions. Qualitative systematic review Metaheuristics Engineering optimization problem Benchmarking Blondin, Maude verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-7844-8874 aut Enthalten in Engineering applications of artificial intelligence Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1988 118 Online-Ressource (DE-627)308447832 (DE-600)1502275-4 (DE-576)094752524 0952-1976 nnns volume:118 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz AR 118 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521 doi (DE-627)ELV008997616 (ELSEVIER)S0952-1976(22)00511-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 004 DE-600 50.23 bkl 54.72 bkl Tzanetos, Alexandros verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1319-513X aut A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction 2022 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions. Qualitative systematic review Metaheuristics Engineering optimization problem Benchmarking Blondin, Maude verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-7844-8874 aut Enthalten in Engineering applications of artificial intelligence Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1988 118 Online-Ressource (DE-627)308447832 (DE-600)1502275-4 (DE-576)094752524 0952-1976 nnns volume:118 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz AR 118 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Engineering applications of artificial intelligence 118 volume:118 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Engineering applications of artificial intelligence 118 volume:118 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
bklname |
Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik Künstliche Intelligenz |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Qualitative systematic review Metaheuristics Engineering optimization problem Benchmarking |
dewey-raw |
004 |
isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
container_title |
Engineering applications of artificial intelligence |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Tzanetos, Alexandros @@aut@@ Blondin, Maude @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2022-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
308447832 |
dewey-sort |
14 |
id |
ELV008997616 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV008997616</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230524152202.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230510s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV008997616</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0952-1976(22)00511-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">50.23</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.72</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tzanetos, Alexandros</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-1319-513X</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Qualitative systematic review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Metaheuristics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Engineering optimization problem</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Benchmarking</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Blondin, Maude</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-7844-8874</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Engineering applications of artificial intelligence</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1988</subfield><subfield code="g">118</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)308447832</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1502275-4</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)094752524</subfield><subfield code="x">0952-1976</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">50.23</subfield><subfield code="j">Regelungstechnik</subfield><subfield code="j">Steuerungstechnik</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.72</subfield><subfield code="j">Künstliche Intelligenz</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">118</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Tzanetos, Alexandros |
spellingShingle |
Tzanetos, Alexandros ddc 004 bkl 50.23 bkl 54.72 misc Qualitative systematic review misc Metaheuristics misc Engineering optimization problem misc Benchmarking A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction |
authorStr |
Tzanetos, Alexandros |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)308447832 |
format |
electronic Article |
dewey-ones |
004 - Data processing & computer science |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut |
collection |
elsevier |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
0952-1976 |
topic_title |
004 DE-600 50.23 bkl 54.72 bkl A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction Qualitative systematic review Metaheuristics Engineering optimization problem Benchmarking |
topic |
ddc 004 bkl 50.23 bkl 54.72 misc Qualitative systematic review misc Metaheuristics misc Engineering optimization problem misc Benchmarking |
topic_unstemmed |
ddc 004 bkl 50.23 bkl 54.72 misc Qualitative systematic review misc Metaheuristics misc Engineering optimization problem misc Benchmarking |
topic_browse |
ddc 004 bkl 50.23 bkl 54.72 misc Qualitative systematic review misc Metaheuristics misc Engineering optimization problem misc Benchmarking |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Engineering applications of artificial intelligence |
hierarchy_parent_id |
308447832 |
dewey-tens |
000 - Computer science, knowledge & systems |
hierarchy_top_title |
Engineering applications of artificial intelligence |
isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)308447832 (DE-600)1502275-4 (DE-576)094752524 |
title |
A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV008997616 (ELSEVIER)S0952-1976(22)00511-5 |
title_full |
A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction |
author_sort |
Tzanetos, Alexandros |
journal |
Engineering applications of artificial intelligence |
journalStr |
Engineering applications of artificial intelligence |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
false |
dewey-hundreds |
000 - Computer science, information & general works |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2022 |
contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
author_browse |
Tzanetos, Alexandros Blondin, Maude |
container_volume |
118 |
class |
004 DE-600 50.23 bkl 54.72 bkl |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Tzanetos, Alexandros |
doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521 |
normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0002-1319-513X (ORCID)0000-0001-7844-8874 |
normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0002-1319-513X (orcid)0000-0001-7844-8874 |
dewey-full |
004 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
a qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: current situation, recommendations, and research direction |
title_auth |
A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction |
abstract |
New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions. |
abstractGer |
New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions. |
abstract_unstemmed |
New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 |
title_short |
A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Blondin, Maude |
author2Str |
Blondin, Maude |
ppnlink |
308447832 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
false |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521 |
up_date |
2024-07-06T21:37:45.182Z |
_version_ |
1803867248587177984 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV008997616</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230524152202.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230510s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105521</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV008997616</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0952-1976(22)00511-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">004</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">50.23</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.72</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tzanetos, Alexandros</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-1319-513X</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">New metaheuristic algorithms have soared over the past ten years. A common practice in proposing a new algorithm is validating it on several benchmark functions and engineering problems. Although CEC benchmark problems are specifically designed to validate the performance of new meta-heuristics, engineering design problems from pressure vessels to springs have been used in hundreds of papers to prove algorithm efficiency. To date, no benchmark practices have been established yet, i.e., researchers design their own benchmark to validate their algorithm. Thus, the high number of new algorithms combined with the high number of different benchmarking setups complicates the comparing and validating processes. In this paper, we study benchmark practices related to engineering applications. In particular, our exhaustive qualitative systematic review focuses on metaheuristics applied to the tension/compression spring design problem (TCSDP). The aim of this study is threefold: (i) evaluate where the field stands in regards of algorithm performance on the TCSDP, (ii) evaluate benchmarking practices, and (iii) facilitate future algorithm comparison. For these purposes, we first review all the existing metaheuristics applied to the TCSDP in their first publication. For each paper, we gather the data regarding the problem definition, the simulation setup, and the optimized design. We evaluated the data through several metrics to find the best-optimized design so far. Our findings and analysis concluded that the field of metaheuristics and its benchmarking practice have not reached maturity yet. Thus, we recommend some actions to address the issues and provide future research directions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Qualitative systematic review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Metaheuristics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Engineering optimization problem</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Benchmarking</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Blondin, Maude</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-7844-8874</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Engineering applications of artificial intelligence</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1988</subfield><subfield code="g">118</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)308447832</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1502275-4</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)094752524</subfield><subfield code="x">0952-1976</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">50.23</subfield><subfield code="j">Regelungstechnik</subfield><subfield code="j">Steuerungstechnik</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.72</subfield><subfield code="j">Künstliche Intelligenz</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">118</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.4005327 |