(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

Vol. 10, No. 5, 2019

Sea Lion Optimization Algorithm

Raja Masadeh1 Basel A. Mahafzah2, Ahmad Sharieh3
Computer Science Department, The World Islamic Sciences Computer Science Department
and Education University, Amman, Jordan The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan

Abstract—This paper suggests a new nature inspired which indicate to the candidate solutions that wing in the
metaheuristic optimization algorithm which is called Sea Lion search space in order to detect the best solution that represent
Optimization (SLnO) algorithm. The SLnO algorithm imitates the optimal solution. Moreover, at the same time, they all
the hunting behavior of sea lions in nature. Moreover, it is track the best solution in their routes. Ant Colony
inspired by sea lions' whiskers that are used in order to detect the Optimization (ACO) algorithm [28] is considered as another
prey. SLnO algorithm is tested with 23 well-known test functions common swarm-based technique. ACO imitates the social
(Benchmarks). Optimization results show that the SLnO behavior of ants in their colony. The most significant
algorithm is very competitive compared to Particle Swarm characteristic of ants is in finding the nearest route from the
Optimization (PSO), Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA),
colony to the food’s source; which is the major inspiration of
Grey Wolf Optimization (GWO), Sine Cosine Algorithm (SCA)
this technique. New metaheuristic optimization algorithm is
and Dragonfly Algorithm (DA).
proposed by [29]. The proposed algorithm called Vocalization
Keywords—Optimization; Metaheuristic optimization of humpback Whale Optimization Algorithm (VWOA) which
algorithms; Benchmarks; Sea Lion Optimization Algorithm (SLnO) mimics the vocalization behavior of humpback whales in
nature. VWOA employs number of humpback whales as
I. INTRODUCTION candidate solutions. Over the course of iterations, the first
Metaheuristic optimization algorithms are becoming more three solutions estimate the location of the female and update
popular in application because they depend on simple their location depends on the humpback female’s position.
concepts and easy to implement. They do not demand gradient Then, they force the female to join their pods.
information. They can bypass local optima and they can be There are other metaheuristic algorithms that are inspired
applied in a wide range of issues covering various disciplines by the behaviors of human. Some of these algorithms are
[1-5]. Teaching Learning Based Optimization (TLBO), Interior
Metaheuristic optimization algorithms are introduced in Search Algorithm (ISA), League Championship Algorithm
order to solve optimization problems by imitating physical or (LCA), Harmony Search (HS) and Colliding Bodies
biological phenomena [6-11]. Therefore, these algorithms are Optimization (CBO).
categorized into three classes; evolution- based, physics- Metaheuristic algorithms that based on population share
based, and swarm-based methods [1, 2, 12-13]. Evolution- popular features regardless of their nature. The search
based techniques are inspired by the natural evolution' laws. operation has two main phases; exploration and exploitation
The search operation begins by randomly generating [9-10]. The operators should always be part of the optimizer in
population that is improved is through subsequent descent. order to globally explore the search space. In this phase,
Usually, these techniques are characterized by combining the movements should be randomly chosen. Then the exploitation
best individuals to form the next individuals' generation. This phase should be applied after the exploration phase, this phase
leads the population over the generations. The most common is to investigate the found search space area in details [12]. In
algorithms of evolution-inspired are Genetic Algorithms (GA) other words the Exploitation is applied on the region that is
[14], Evolution Strategy (ES) [15], Genetic Programming found by the exploration phase. Any metaheuristic algorithm
(GP) [16], Biogeography-Based Optimizer (BBO) [17] and faces a challenge in making balance between exploration and
Probability-Based Incremental Learning (PBIL) [18]. exploitation due to the stochastic nature of the optimization
Physics-based methods mimic the physical principles in process [13].
the world. Some of the most common techniques are Ray This paper introduces a novel metaheuristic optimization
Optimization (RO) [19], Black Hole (BH) [20], Small-World algorithm that is called Sea Lion Optimization (SLnO)
Optimization Algorithm (SWOA) [21], Simulated Annealing algorithm imitating the hunting behavior of sea lions. Upon of
(SA) [22], Big-Bang Big-Crunch (BBBC) [23], Gravitational our knowledge, there is no study on this subject. The strength
Search Algorithm (GSA) [24], Charged System Search (CSS) point of this algorithm is the artificial hunting behavior with
[25] and Curved Space Optimization (CSO) [26]. random or the best search agent in order to hunt the bait ball
Swarm- based methods are the third class of nature (prey) and the usage of the whiskers of sea lions and their
inspired techniques which imitate the social behavior of vocalizations. The performance of the SLnO algorithm is
animals in nature. The most common technique is Particle evaluated in this work by solving 23 well-known optimization
Swarm Optimization (PSO) [27] which is mimics the bird problems. The results show that SLnO algorithm is very
flocking's social behavior. PSO employs number of particles competitive compared to other popular metaheuristic
algorithms.

388 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 10, No. 5, 2019

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 The main phases of hunting behavior of sea lions are as
introduced a description of Sea Lion Optimization (SLnO) shown in Fig.1 and as follows:
algorithm in this research. Benchmarks functions and the
optimization results are described and discussed in Section 3.  Tracking and chasing the prey using their whiskers.
Finally, Section 4 draws the conclusion of this work.  Calling other members that joined their subgroup,
pursing and encircling the prey.
II. SEA LION OPTIMIZATION (SLNO) ALGORITHM
In this section, the inspiration of the Sea Lion optimization  Attack towards the prey.
(SLnO) method is first discussed. Then, the mathematical In this work this hunting technique of sea lions is
model for SLnO is provided. mathematically modeled in order to design SLnO algorithm
A. Inspiration and perform optimization.
Sea lion is considered as one of the most intelligent B. Mathematical model for SLnO algorithm
animals [30]. Sea lions live in huge colonies which have In this subsection the mathematical models for the social
thousands of members [30]. There are plenty of subgroups that hierarchy, tracking, encircling, and attacking prey are
have their own hierarchy within them. Sea lions can also provided. Then, the SLnO algorithm is outlined.
navigate around these subgroups several times in their lives.
The navigation of sea lions relies on their sex, age and the 1) Detecting and tracking phase: As mentioned above,
function that they have for the whole colony [30, 31]. sea lions are used their whiskers to detect the size, shape and
position of prey. As shown in Fig. 2, when the whiskers
The most important characteristic of sea lions is how
quickly they respond to fish movements [32]. In other words, direction is on the opposite direction of water waves, this
they have the ability to locate fish and react immediately, in helps sea lion to sense the existing prey and to detect their
order to gather them towards shallow water to be near the position. However, the whiskers vibrated less than when its
shore and the surface of ocean. Moreover, they have orientation on the same current orientation.
wonderful senses that help them to find out prey such as fishes
even in dark underwater. Their eyes indicate forward the prey;
in which they can easily focus on their prey. More precisely,
they can open their pupils widely to allow a lot of light into
their eyes for a clear underwater vision [33].However,
sometimes vision in murky environment is not clear enough
[33, 34]. For this reason, sea lions depend on their super
sensitive whiskers which are the most significant
characteristic of them [35]. These whiskers help them to feel
exactly the positions of prey. When the preys swim around
them, they leave wakes or waves behind them. Thus, sea lions
can follow them using their whiskers [36].
The longest whiskers of all mammals are 30 cm [37]. They
can move them forwards and backwards. Sea lions can use Fig. 1. Hunting behavior of Sea Lions: (A) Chasing, Approaching, and
them to specify the size, shape and position of prey. In Tracking Prey, (B) Encircling, (C) Stationary Situation and Attack.
addition; cross section of facial whiskers for sea lions is oval;
which is different from other mammals that have circular
facial whiskers [36, 38]. Researchers have illustrated that this
is the best form to detect the speed and direction of waves
[36].
The other characteristic of sea lions is their ability to move
efficiently and quickly over water [33, 39]. Back flippers are
employed for guidance, while front flippers are employed for
pushing their selves. They have the ability to chase prey at
velocity of around 30 mph and they are flexible enough to
alter their directions quickly. For this reason, sea lions employ
their whiskers [39].
Hunting together as groups of sea lions increase the
opportunities of obtaining more prey especially when there are
huge numbers of fishes. Usually, sea lions chasing together by
collecting prey in to narrow balls and catching the individuals’
prey that located on the edges [33, 40, 41]. Sea lions know
when to hunt together and usually do that when prey is plenty. Fig. 2. The Relation between the Whisker’ Orientation and the Current’
However, they hunt individually when the prey is few. Orientation.

389 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 10, No. 5, 2019

Sea lion can identify the position of prey and call other Usually the target prey is considered the current candidate best
members that will join its subgroup to chase and hunt the prey. solution. However, a new search agent can be defined, detects
This sea lion is considered as a leader for this hunting better preys and encircle them.
mechanism and other members update their positions towards
the target prey. SLnO algorithm assumes the target prey is the In order to mathematically model the hunting behavior of
current best solution or close to optimal solution. This sea lions, two phases are introduced as follows:
behavior is represented mathematically using Eq. (1). a) Dwindling encircling technique: This behavior
⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑
( ) ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑
( ) (1) depends on the value of ⃑ in Eq. (2). More precisely, ⃑ is
decreased linearly from 2 to 0 over the course of iterations.
Where ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ indicates to the distance between the target Thus, this decreasing leads the leader of sea lion to move
prey and the sea lion; ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑
( ) and ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑
( ) represent the positions towards the prey and encircle them. Thus, the incoming
vectors of the target prey and sea lion, respectively; the location of a sea lion (search agent) can be located anywhere
current iteration is denoted as t and ⃑ is random vector in [0, between the premier location of the agent and the location of
1] which is multiplied by 2 to increase the search space that the present best agent.
help search agents to find optimal or near optimal solution. b) Circle updating position: As illustrated in Fig. 4,
At the next iteration, the sea lion moves toward the target sea lions chase bait ball of fishes and hunt them starting from
prey to be nearest. This behavior is modeled mathematically edges. Eq. (6) is proposed in this regard.
as in Eq. (2). ⃑⃑⃑⃑ ( ⃑⃑⃑⃑ ( )|
) |⃑⃑⃑ ( ) ( ) ⃑⃑⃑ ( ) (6)
⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑
( ) ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑
( ) ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ (2)
Where |⃑⃑⃑ ( ) ⃑⃑⃑⃑ ( )| represents the distance between the
Where (t + 1) represents the next iteration and is best optimal solution (target prey) and the search agent (sea
decreased linearly from 2 to 0 over the course of iterations lion), | | indicates to the absolute value and m is a random
because this decreasing obliges the sea lion' leader to move number in [-1, 1]. The sea lion swims around prey (bait ball)
towards the current prey and surround them. along circle shaped path in order to start hunting prey that are
at the edge of the bait ball. For this reason, ( ) is used
2) Vocalization phase: Sea lions are considered to represent this behavior mathematically.
amphibians. In other words, Sea lions live in water and on
land. Their sounds move four times faster in water than in air
[42].Sea lions communicate with each other using various
vocalizations especially when they are chasing and hunting as
a subgroup [43]. Furthermore, they use their sound to call
other members that stay on the shore. For this reason, sea lions
chase and confine prey to become close to the surface of
ocean. In addition, they have small ears which capable to
detect sounds under and above water [30, 33]. Thus, when a
sea lion identifies a prey, he calls other members to encircle
and attack the prey [30, 44]. This behavior is modeled
mathematically as in Eqs. (3), (4) and (5).
⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ (⃑⃑⃑ ( ⃑⃑⃑ )) ⃑⃑⃑ ) (3)
Fig. 3. Sea Lion’ Sounds Waves Reflection and Refraction in Two different
⃑ (4) Medium.

⃑ (5)
Where ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ indicates to the speed of sound of sea lion
leader, ⃑⃑⃑ and ⃑⃑⃑ represents the speed of sounds in water and
in air, respectively. More precisely, as shown in Fig. 3, when
the sea lion makes a sound, this is reflected to the other
medium which is the air (for calling other members that are at
the shore) and refracted at the same medium for calling
members who are under water. Thus, the first case is
represented using ( ); while the other case is represented
using ( ).
3) Attacking phase (Exploitation phase): Sea lions will be
able to recognize the position of target prey and encircle them.
The hunt method is guided by the leader (best search agent)
who detects the prey and tells others members about them. Fig. 4. Circle updating Position of Sea Lions based on Bait Ball (Prey).

390 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 10, No. 5, 2019

4) Searching for prey (Exploration phase): In nature, sea The proposed SLnO algorithm starts with random
lions search randomly employing their whiskers and solutions. Each search agent updates its location based on best
swimming zigzagging to find prey. Thus, in this study, is solution or random search agent. Parameter (C) is minimized
employed with the random values. In case is greater than from 2 to 0 over course of iterations to supply both
exploration and exploitation phases. More precisely, when the
one or less than negative one, this leads to force sea lions to
move away from the target prey and the sea lion’ leader. value of | | is greater than one, this means a search agent is
Therefore, this situation obliges sea lions to search for other chosen randomly. While, when | | is less than one; this means
prey. search agents update their locations. Finally, by the
satisfaction of an ending criterion, SLnO algorithm is stopped.
In exploitation phase, the sea lions update their positions
based on the best search agent. However, in exploration phase, Fig. 5 illustrates the flowchart of SLnO algorithm.
the search agents update their positions according to a selected III. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
randomly sea lion. In other words, when is greater than one,
this leads that SLnO algorithm to perform a global search The proposed SLnO algorithm is benchmarked on 23
agent and find the global optimal solution. Eq. (7) and Eq. (8) benchmark functions that are the classical functions utilized
are proposed in this regard. by many researchers [1, 2, 45, 46]. SLnO algorithm is
compared with recently metaheuristic optimization
⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ ⃑⃑⃑⃑ ( ) ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑
( ) (7) algorithms; WOA, GWO and PSO. Tables I to III brief the test
problems that are denoting the function's cost, range of
variation of optimization variables and the optimal value that
⃑⃑⃑⃑ ( ) ⃑⃑⃑⃑ ( ) ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ (8) is denoted as fmin in previous studies.

Where ⃑⃑⃑⃑ ( ) indicates to random sea lion that is In general, these benchmark functions are minimization
selected from the current population. functions as well as can be categorized into three groups;
unimodal, multimodal and fixed-dimension multimodal
functions. Fig. 6 to Fig. 8 show the 2D plots of function's cost
for 23 benchmark functions which considered in this work.
The experiments are conducted using Matlab R2016a. For
all algorithms, the proposed SLnO and existing WOA, GWO
and PSO algorithms, a population size is 300 and maximum
iteration equal to 500. Each of these algorithms was run 30
times on each benchmark function.

TABLE I. DETAILS OF UNIMODAL BENCHMARK FUNCTIONS (MIRJALILI

AND LEWIS, 016)

Function V_no Range fmin

( ) ∑ 30 [-100, 100] 0

( ) ∑ ∏ 30 [-10, 10] 0

( ) ∑ (∑ ) 30 [-100, 100] 0

( ) * + 30 [-100, 100] 0

( ) ∑ , ( )
30 [-30, 30] 0
( )-

( ) ∑ (, -) 30 [-100, 100] 0

[-1.28,
( ) ∑ ( ) 30 0
1.28]
Fig. 5. Flowchart of SLnO Algorithm.

391 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 10, No. 5, 2019

TABLE II. DETAILS OF MULTIMODAL BENCHMARK FUNCTIONS TABLE III. DETAILS OF FIXED-DIMENSION MULTIMODAL BENCHMARK
(MIRJALILI AND LEWIS, 016) FUNCTIONS (MIRJALILI AND LEWIS, 016)

Function V_no Range fmin Function V_no Range fmin

( )
-
( ) ∑ (√ 30 [-500, 500] (
418.98295 2 [-65, 65] 1
∑ )
∑ ( )
( ) ∑ [ ( )
30 [-5.12, 5.12] 0 ( )
] ( ) 4 [-5, 5] 0.00030
∑ , -

( )
( )
2 [-5, 5] -1.0316
( √ ∑ )
30 [-32, 32] 0
( ) ( )
( ∑ ( ))
(
2 [-5, 5] 0.398
)
( )
∑ ( ) , ( ) (
30 [-600, 600] 0
∏ ( ) 2 [-2, 2] 3
√
)-
( ) (* ( )
( )
∑ ( ) ,
-( )- ( ) + ∑ ( ∑ ( 3 [1, 3] -3.86
∑ ( )}
) )
30 [-50, 50] 0 ( )
( )
∑ ( ∑ ( 6 [0, 1] -3.32
( )
{ ) )
( )
( ) ∑ ,( )( )
4 [0, 10] -10.4028
( ) -
* ( )
∑ ( ) , ( ) ∑ ,( )( )
4 [0, 10] -10.5363
30 [-50, 50] 0 -
( )-
( ) , ( )-+
( ) ∑ ,( )( )
∑ ( ) 4 [0, 10] -10.1532
-

Fig. 6. 2D Representations of Benchmark Mathematical unimodal Fig. 7. 2D Representations of Benchmark Mathematical Multimodal
Functions. Functions.

392 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 10, No. 5, 2019

The convergence curves of SLnO, SCA, DA, WOA, GWO

and PSO algorithms are presented in Fig.9, in order to show
these algorithms' convergence rate. Knowing that the "average
best-so-far" denotes the best solutions' average that acquired at
each iteration over 30 runs. As shown in these figures, when
optimizing the test benchmarks functions, SLnO algorithm
illustrates two convergence behaviors. In the first behavior,
the SLnO algorithm's convergence tends to be instant as
iteration increases as observed in F3, F4, F14, F21, F22 and
F23. This is probably due to the adaptation technique that
suggested for SLnO algorithm. At the initial stage of each
iteration, the adaptation technique helps to search for
optimizing regions of search space, then after passing almost
half or slightly less of the iterations it convergence towards the
optimal solution. In the second behavior, the convergence
tends towards optimal solution rapidly from the initial stages
of iterations. This behavior is evident in the rest benchmark
functions.
As an outline, the outcomes of this subsection discovered
Fig. 8. 2D Representations of Benchmark Mathematical Fixed-Dimension
Multimodal Functions.
various characteristics of the suggested SLnO algorithm. The
exploration of SLnO algorithm is high because the location
A. Evaluation of Exploitation Capability (Functions F1–F7) updating technique of sea lions using Eq. (8). This formula
requires sea lions to proceed randomly around each other
Functions F1-F7 are unimodal functions in which they through the initial stages of iterations. However, high
have only one global optimum. Moreover, they allow exploitation and convergence are intensified in the reminder of
evaluating the capability of exploitation of inspected iterations using Eq. (6). This leads the sea lions to quickly re-
metaheuristic optimization algorithms. According to the location themselves around bait ball in circular shaped path in
results of Table IV, SLnO is able to offer competitive order towards the best solution. The SLnO algorithm
outcomes. SLnO was the most efficient optimizer compared to illustrates avoidance of high local optimal solution and speed
the well-known optimizers especially functions F1, F2, F4 and of convergence simultaneously over the course of iterations.
F5 as well as at least it was the second best optimizer in most
benchmark functions. The outcomes prove the performance of the SLnO
algorithm in solving several test functions compared to PSO,
B. Evaluation of Exploitation Capability (Functions F8–F23) WOA and GWO algorithms. PSO algorithm doesn't have
In contrast to the unimodal functions, multimodal operators to dedicate particular iterations to exploitation or
functions involve many local optima with increasing the exploration. More precisely, PSO employs one equation to
number exponentially with the size of problem. Thus, this type update the search agents' locations, which leads to increase the
of benchmark functions turn very suitable and useful in case stagnation in local optima. While, WOA and GWO algorithms
the target is to evaluate the exploration ability of an have good results due to they have operators to consecrate
optimization algorithm. According to the outcomes in Table particular iterations to exploitation or exploration. However,
V, for functions F8–F23, the SLnO algorithm has a good the SLnO has better results than WOA and GWO in the most
exploration capability. As seen in Table V, it is obvious that benchmark functions because it has fewer operators that assist
SLnO is the most efficient or the second best optimizer in the to both exploitation and exploration.
majority of benchmark functions.
C. Convergence Behavior Analysis
In this subsection the convergence behavior of SLnO
algorithm is investigated. Based on Fig. 9, it is observed that
search agent of the SLnO algorithm tends to search favorable
regions of design space, as well as utilizes the best one. In the
early stages of the optimization operation, these search agents
change suddenly and afterward progressively converge. Based
on [47], this behavior can ensure that a SLnO algorithm which
is based on the population converges to a point in search
space. In Fig. 9, convergence curves of the proposed
algorithms, PSO, WOA, SCA, DA and GWO algorithms are
compared for 23 benchmarks problem. It is obvious that SLnO
algorithm is enough competitive with the existing Fig. 9. Comparison of Convergence Curves of SLnO Algorithms and
metaheuristic optimization algorithms. Recently Algorithms Obtained in Some of the Benchmark Problems.

393 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 10, No. 5, 2019

TABLE IV. COMPARISON OF OPTIMIZERS’ RESULTS OBTAINED FOR UNIMODAL BENCHMARK FUNCTIONS

Fs SLnO SCA PSO WOA DA GWO

Avg. Std. Avg. Std. Avg. Std. Avg. Std. Avg. Std. Avg. Std.
2.23E- 4.32E- 7.961E-
F1 2.18E-45 5.75E-45 9.832E-04 13.254E-04 2.04E-23 6.39E-23 11.36E-05 2.20E-28 4.12E-28
09 09 05
5.65E- 5.82E- 14.37E-
F2 1.45E-37 3.98E-37 17.359E-04 17.984E-04 9.93E-37 5.98E-35 15.37E-04 9.04E-36 6.94E-29
05 05 04
F3 -2.51E-04 1.67E-04 11.2354 13.5478 8.73309 3.78789 -2.71E-04 2.77E-04 12.9876 15.0128 -6.04E-04 2.01E-04
1.03091
F4 0.069321 0.41982 2.3742 3.6874 0.42617 0.35008 0.19677 1.9876 2.2345 0.98630 0.86921
5
49.6269 41.3711
F5 26.06146 0.31024 66.9875 61.5879 32.00966 3.24879 65.2495 58.6547 33.92145 5.00098
5 6
3.82E- 6.17E-
F6 0.00063 0.00030 0.99874 1.9821 0.003638 0.00140 1.3257 2.0275 0.98979 1.02147
09 09
F7 0.00045 0.00047 0.00795 0.00925 0.04727 0.01569 0.023175 0.00847 2.9024 2.9999 0.00009 0.00078

TABLE V. COMPARISON OF OPTIMIZERS’ RESULTS OBTAINED FOR MULTIMODAL BENCHMARK FUNCTIONS

Fs SlnO SCA PSO WOA DA GWO

Avg. Std. Avg. Std. Avg. Std. Avg. Std. Avg. Std. Avg. Std.

F8 -12389.05 382.570263 29.3456 321.821 -6981.15 848.8447 -14219.09 472.66037 37.9524 371.9542 25.23801 295.86792

F9 3.78E-15 1.44E-14 46.0247 24.2408 32.30133 8.73574 2.66E-15 2.43E-14 42.3214 12.3578 4.12021 1.90716

3.024E-
F10 4.32E-15 2.37E-15 5.012E-05 2.85E-05 1.81E-05 5.00E-15 2.94E-15 4.89E-05 2.02E-05 6.42E-17 6.31E-15
05

F11 0.00285 0.00761 1.9574 2.3541 0.00992 0.01116 0.00496 0.00876 1.2783 1.9821 0.07942 1.99659

F12 -1.00040 0.00190 1.9872 2.3457 3.82E-11 3.87E-11 0.00066 0.00299 1.2702 1.6247 0.98764 0.10079

F13 0.00037 0.00046 2.1348 2.7321 0.00366 0.02005 0.00287 0.00396 1.3472 1.4215 0.98937 0.42215

F14 1.00641 0.13622 1.0227 0.9867 1.03113 0.18147 1.02163 0.14584 1.0367 12.318 1.06157 15.13597

F15 0.00052 0.00023 0.3156 0.8179 0.00056 0.00024 0.00061 0.00044 0.9043 1.3782 0.28946 0.71108

7.78E-
F16 -1.0316 6.77E-16 1.5462 7.3589 -2.0218 0.04326 7.00E-16 2.8278 2.9817 0.92497 0.09844
16

F17 0.39686 1.69E-16 1.8234 7.3215 0.39799 1.79E-16 1.438789 2.67E-16 1.9254 8.3897 2.73245 5.48978

1.33E-
F18 3 0 3.0982 1.8245 3 3 4.22E-05 3.0261 0.1124 1.62785 9.38998
15

F19 -3.8984 0.00141 1.2761 4.3257 -3.8628 3.16E-15 -1.98761 1.00253 0.8976 0.9951 0.20211 0.42842

F20 -3.2599 0.06460 1.4801 0.9207 -3.25858 0.06033 -2.12657 0.06460 0.7608 0.6247 0.85685 0.21593

F21 -10.15317 9.52E-05 9.3801 4.3852 -8.97126 2.17908 -9.16430 9.98E-05 7.7785 6.8927 6.16721 2.51935

-
F22 -10.27894 0.97040 6.3875 3.3861 0.96291 -10.22664 0.98040 5.3692 2.3578 4.20056 1.24785
10.22709

F23 -827.5677 1.61753 5.9632 0.2145 -9.63822 2.04274 -637.668 1.61753 3.36980 0.8732 4.33169 0.96579

encircling bait ball and the vocalization of sea lions.

IV. CONCLUSION Moreover, this work was conducted on 23 mathematical
This research presented a novel swarm based optimization optimization problems in order to analyze the exploration
algorithm which mimics the sea lions' hunting behavior. The phase, exploitation phase and the suggested method's
suggested technique is called Sea Lion Optimization (SLnO) convergence behavior. Optimization results showed that SLnO
algorithm involved three main factors to simulate the algorithm is competitive comparing with other recently
exploration of bait ball using the whiskers of sea lions, metaheuristic algorithms.

394 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 10, No. 5, 2019

REFERENCES [24] Rashedi, E., Nezamabadi-Pour, H., & Saryazdi, S. (2009). GSA: a
[1] Mirjalili, S., & Lewis, A. (2016). The whale optimization algorithm. gravitational search algorithm. Information sciences,179(13),2232-2248.‫‏‬
Advances in engineering software, 95, 51-67.‫‏‬ [25] Kaveh, A., & Talatahari, S. (2010). A novel heuristic optimization
[2] Mirjalili, S., Mirjalili, S. M., & Lewis, A. (2014). Grey wolf optimizer. method: charged system search. Acta Mechanica, 213(3-4), 267-289.‫‏‬
Advances in engineering software, 69, 46-61.‫‏‬ [26] Moghaddam, F. F., Moghaddam, R. F., & Cheriet, M. (2012). Curved
[3] Masadeh, R., Sharieh, A., & Sliet, A. (2017). Grey wolf optimization space optimization: a random search based on general relativity theory.
applied to the maximum flow problem. International Journal of arXiv preprint arXiv:1208.2214.‫‏‬
Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(7), 95-100.‫‏‬ [27] Kennedy J , Eberhart R . Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of
[4] Masadeh, R., Alzaqebah, A., & Sharieh, A. (2018). Whale Optimization the 1995 IEEE international conference on neural networks; 1995. p.
Algorithm for Solving the Maximum Flow Problem. Journal of 1942–8.
Theoretical & Applied Information Technology, 96(8).‫‏‬ [28] Dorigo M , Birattari M , Stutzle T . Ant colony optimization. IEEE
[5] Alzaqebah, A., Masadeh, R., & Hudaib, A. (2018, April). Whale Comput Intell 2006;1:28–39.
optimization algorithm for requirements prioritization. In 2018 9th [29] Masadeh, R., Sharieh, A., & Mahafzah, B. (2019), Humpback Whale
International Conference on Information and Communication Systems Optimization Algorithm Based on Vocal Behavior for Task Scheduling
(ICICS) (pp. 84-89). IEEE.‫‏‬ in Cloud Computing. International Journal of Advanced Science and
[6] Aryaf Al-Adwan, Ahmad Sharieh, and Basel A. Mahafzah "Parallel Technology, 13 (3), 121-140.
heuristic local search algorithm on OTIS hyper hexa-cell and OTIS [30] Pitcher, B. J., Harcourt, R. G., & Charrier, I. (2012). Individual identity
mesh of trees optoelectronic architectures" Applied Intelligence, Vol. encoding and environmental constraints in vocal recognition of pups by
49(2), pp. 661-688, 2019. Australian sea lion mothers. Animal Behaviour, 83(3), 681-690.‫‏‬
[7] Aryaf Al-Adwan, Basel A. Mahafzah, and Ahmad Sharieh “Solving [31] Folkens, P. A., & Reeves, R. R. (2002). Guide to marine mammals of
traveling salesman problem using parallel repetitive nearest neighbor the world (No. Sirsi) i9780375411410). National Audubon Society.‫‏‬
algorithm on OTIS-Hypercube and OTIS-Mesh optoelectronic [32] Pitcher, T. J., Kalikoski, D., Short, K., Varkey, D., & Pramod, G.
architectures” Journal of Supercomputing, Vol. 74(1), pp. 1-36, 2018. (2009). An evaluation of progress in implementing ecosystem-based
[8] Basel A. Mahafzah, “Performance evaluation of parallel multithreaded management of fisheries in 33 countries. Marine Policy, 33(2), 223-232.‫‏‬
A* heuristic search algorithm” Journal of Information Science, SAGE, [33] Schusterman, R. J. (1981). Behavioral capabilities of seals and sea lions:
United Kingdom, Vol. 40(3), pp. 363-375, 2014. a review of their hearing, visual, learning and diving skills. The
[9] Mohammad A. Alshraideh, Basel A. Mahafzah, Hamzeh S. Eyal psychological record, 31(2), 125-143.‫‏‬
Salman, Imad Salah, “Using genetic algorithm as test data generator for [34] Poulter, T. C. (1963). Sonar signals of the sea lion. Science, 139(3556),
stored PL/SQL program units” Journal of Software Engineering and 753-755.‫‏‬
Applications, Vol. 6(2), pp. 65-73, 2013.
[35] Marine and Coastal Ecology Research Center, [Link]
[10] Mohammad Alshraideh, Basel A. Mahafzah, and Saleh Al-Sharaeh, “A [Link]/, last accessed 15 March 2019.
multiple-population genetic algorithm for branch coverage test data
generation” Software Quality Journal, Vol. 19(3), pp. 489-513, 2011. [36] Lowther, A. D., Harcourt, R. G., Hamer, D. J., & Goldsworthy, S. D.
(2011). Creatures of habit: foraging habitat fidelity of adult female
[11] Basel A. Mahafzah, “Parallel multithreaded IDA* heuristic search: Australian sea lions. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 443, 249-263.‫‏‬
Algorithm design and performance evaluation” International Journal of
Parallel, Emergent and Distributed Systems, Vol. 26(1), pp. 61-82, 2011. [37] Marine Mammal Research Unit, [Link] last accessed 15
March 2019.
[12] Masadeh, R., Hudaib, A., & Alzaqebah, A. (2018). WGW: A hybrid
[38] Sea Lion World, [Link]
approach based on whale and grey wolf optimization algorithms for
structure/, last accessed 15 March 2019
requirements prioritization. Advances in Systems Science and
Applications, 18(2), 63-83.‫‏‬ [39] Biographic, [Link] last
accessed 15 March 2019.
[13] Masadeh, R., Alzaqebah, A., Hudaib, A., & Rahman, A. A. (2018). Grey
Wolf Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization. Modern Applied [40] NOAA Fishers, [Link] spe
Science, 12(2), 54.‫‏‬ cies/marine_mammals/pinnipeds/california_sea_lions.html, last accesses
[14] Holland JH . Genetic algorithms. Sci Am 1992; 267:66–72. 15 March 2019.
[15] Rechenberg I . Evolutions strategien (1978). Springer Berlin Heidelberg; [41] NOAA National Ocean Service, [Link]
1978 p. 83–114. 9&utf8=%E2%9C%93&affiliate=[Link]&query=sea+li
on, last accessed 15 March 2019.
[16] J.R. Koza, “Genetic programming,”1992.
[42] Rogers, P. H., & Cox, M. (1988). Underwater sound as a biological
[17] Simon D . Biogeography-based optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput stimulus, In Sensory biology of aquatic animals, Springer, New York,
2008; 12:702–13. NY, 131-149.‫‏‬
[18] Dasgupta D, Zbigniew M, editors (2013). Evolutionary algorithms in [43] Evans, W. E., & Haugen, R. M. (1963). An experimental study of the
engineering applications. Springer Science & Business Media. echolocation ability of a California sea lion, Zalophus californianus
[19] Kaveh, A., & Khayatazad, M. (2012). A new meta-heuristic method: ray (Lesson). Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences,
optimization. Computers & structures, 112, 283-294.‫‏‬ 62(4), 165-175.‫‏‬
[20] Hatamlou, A. (2013). Black hole: A new heuristic optimization approach [44] Pacific Marine Mammal Center, [Link] last
for data clustering. Information sciences, 222, 175-184.‫‏‬ accessed 15 March 2019.
[21] Jiao, L., Wang, L., Gao, X., Liu, J., & Wu, F. (Eds.). (2006). Advances [45] Yao, X., Liu, Y., & Lin, G. (1999). Evolutionary programming made
in Natural Computation: Second International Conference, ICNC 2006, faster, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary computation, 3(2), 82-102.‫‏‬
Xi'an, China, September 24-28,2006, Proceedings (Vol. 4222). Springer.‫‏‬ [46] Digalakis, J. G., & Margaritis, K. G. (2001). On benchmarking functions
[22] Černý, V. (1985). Thermodynamical approach to the traveling salesman for genetic algorithms. International journal of computer mathematics,
problem: An efficient simulation algorithm. Journal of optimization 77(4), 481-506.‫‏‬
theory and applications, 45(1), 41-51.‫‏‬ [47] Van den Bergh, F., & Engelbrecht, A. P. (2006). A study of particle
[23] Erol, O. K., & Eksin, I. (2006). A new optimization method: big bang– swarm optimization particle trajectories, Information sciences, 176(8),
big crunch. Advances in Engineering Software, 37(2), 106-111.‫‏‬ 937-971.‫‏‬

395 | P a g e
[Link]