Newsgroups: comp.ai.genetic
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!hudson.lm.com!netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!sun4nl!sci.kun.nl!avkampen
From: avkampen@sci.kun.nl (A. van Kampen)
Subject: GA versus SA
Message-ID: <D1u7ps.E3y@sci.kun.nl>
Summary: When use a GA, When use SA?
Keywords: Genetic Algorithms, Simulated Annealing
Sender: news@sci.kun.nl (News owner)
Nntp-Posting-Host: ac7.sci.kun.nl
Organization: University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.4.19
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 16:13:03 GMT
Lines: 28

Hello out there,

I don't know if there was already an discussion about the comparison
of genetic algorithms (GAs) and simulated annealing (SA), but I have
a few questions about it.

   How do we choose for a specific optimization method (GA or SA) when
   we want to solve a optimization problem?

   GAs and SA are both global methods and should therefore be
   both suitable for solving the same problems (or not? Can we
   define classes of problems for which GAs perform better than
   SA?).

   I think SA is much easier to configure because it is not as
   complex as the GA and because it has less parameters to set
   (cooling scheme, length of markov chain, method to modify
    parameters)

   I short: Why use GAs if we have SA?

I think this may be a starting point for a discussion about GA versus SA

--
|  Antoine van Kampen                                          |
|  University of Nijmegen, Laboratory for Analytical Chemistry |
|  the Netherlands                                             |
|  Email: avkampen@sci.kun.nl                                  |
