Open Access
Table 2
A comparison between BFO, PSO, GA, DE, and SA.
| Criteria | BFO | PSO | GA | DE | SA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Convergence speed | Moderate | Fast | Slow to moderate | Fast | Slow |
| Accuracy | High | Moderate | Moderate | High | Moderate |
| Robustness | High (Resistant to local minima) | Moderate (Prone to premature convergence) | Moderate (Depends on population size) | High (Good exploration-exploitation balance) | Low (Stochastic behavior affects stability) |
| Computational complexity | Moderate to High | Low | High | Moderate | Moderate |
| Exploration vs. Exploitation | Balanced | Good exploitation but weak exploration | More exploration than exploitation | Well-balanced | Highly stochastic, risk of poor exploitation |
| Handling of nonlinearities | Excellent | Moderate | Moderate | Good | Weak |
| Ability to escape local minima | Strong bacterial behavior prevents stagnation | Weak | Depends on mutation strategy | Strong (Adaptive mutation) | Weak (Prone to local minima) |
| Best suited for electrical machine parameter identification? | (Accurate and robust for nonlinear systems) | (Prone to local minima, less accurate) | (Slow convergence, needs large population) | (High computational cost) | (Unstable for complex systems) |
| References | [27–35] | ||||
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.