IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jamc00/v1y2010i4p75-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research Commentary: Survival of the Fittest Algorithm or the Novelest Algorithm?

Author

Listed:
  • Zong Woo Geem

    (iGlobal University, USA)

Abstract

Recently a paper was published which claims “harmony search is equivalent to evolution strategies and because the latter is not popular currently, the former has no future. Also, research community was misguided by the former’s disguised novelty.” This paper is written to rebut the original paper’s claims by saying 1) harmony search is different from evolution strategies because each has its own uniqueness, 2) performance, rather than novelty, is an algorithm’s survival factor, and 3) the original paper was biased to mislead into a predefined conclusion.” Also, the shortcomings of current review system, citation system, and funding system are briefly mentioned.

Suggested Citation

  • Zong Woo Geem, 2010. "Research Commentary: Survival of the Fittest Algorithm or the Novelest Algorithm?," International Journal of Applied Metaheuristic Computing (IJAMC), IGI Global, vol. 1(4), pages 75-79, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:igg:jamc00:v:1:y:2010:i:4:p:75-79
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/jamc.2010100105
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Weyland, Dennis, 2015. "A critical analysis of the harmony search algorithm—How not to solve sudoku," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 97-105.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:igg:jamc00:v:1:y:2010:i:4:p:75-79. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.