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

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Tzanetos, Alexandros [verfasserIn] Blondin, Maude [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2022

Schlagwörter:	Qualitative systematic review Metaheuristics Engineering optimization problem Benchmarking

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

Internformat


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

Indexfelder

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

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

A qualitative systematic review of metaheuristics applied to tension/compression spring design problem: Current situation, recommendations, and research direction

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?