Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Replacing Nelder-Mead with Hooke-Jeeves in MCCGA #43

Closed
jbytecode opened this issue Oct 23, 2022 · 4 comments
Closed

Replacing Nelder-Mead with Hooke-Jeeves in MCCGA #43

jbytecode opened this issue Oct 23, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@jbytecode
Copy link
Contributor

I am going to send a pull request that replaces Nelder-Mead local search part with Hooke-Jeeves in MCCGA algorithm.

This PR gains these items:

  • Reduces the dependencies of outer packages
  • Hooke-Jeeves is not only a local search algorithm but is a direct-search algorithm
  • Hooke-Jeeves does not use derivatives
@jmejia8
Copy link
Owner

jmejia8 commented Oct 23, 2022

What a great contribution! It would be nice to have Hooke-Jeeves (Pattern Search) as another implemented algorithm.

optimize(f, bounds, PatternSearch())

Since the Hooke-Jeeves method and other methods require a starting solution, I opened #46 to solve those possible scenarios.

@jbytecode
Copy link
Contributor Author

jbytecode commented Oct 23, 2022

Yes, we can separate hj() from the MCCGA files and implement it as an independent algorithm, of course in the next step.

@jmejia8
Copy link
Owner

jmejia8 commented Oct 23, 2022

I'm fine with that.

jmejia8 added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 23, 2022
(#43) Replacing Nelder-Mead with Hooke-Jeeves in MCCGA
@jbytecode
Copy link
Contributor Author

jbytecode commented Oct 23, 2022

Since the PR is merged, we can close this issue for now.

When we get ready to implement Hooke & Jeeves as a separate algorithm, we can create a new one if needed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants