ArticleScientific reports2025
An improved enterprise development optimizer based on labor migration for numerical optimization.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Enhanced Randomized Dung Beetle Optimizer for Global Optimization Problems.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Enterprise Development Optimizer (EDO) is a meta-heuristic algorithm inspired by the enterprise development process. Although EDO is effective in the optimization field, it suffers from issues such as premature convergence and unequal exploration-exploitation ratio. These shortcomings restrict the performance of the algorithm in some complex problem. This research proposes an improved EDO, called LMEDO, in which EDO is integrated with incorporates time-phase based switching strategy, economy-driven guided based learning strategy and spatial selectivity-based selection strategy to improve convergence rate, stability, and search effectiveness. Among these strategies, the time-phase based switching strategy allows EDO to better apply different search strategies and enhances the search capability. Economy-driven guided learning-based strategy helps EDOs absorb valid information from dominant groups, which in turn improves the quality of the entire population. The spatial selectivity-based selection strategy achieves a balance between exploitation and exploration capabilities. To validate the performance of LMEDO, an extensive evaluation of the CEC 2018 test suite and five engineering optimization problems was performed. Parameter sensitivity analysis assisted LMEDO in determining the optimal parameter settings. Ablation experiments confirmed the effectiveness and compatibility of the improved strategies. The superiority of LMEDO is validated by comparing it with state-of-the-art algorithms such as LSHADE-SPACMA, APSM-jSO, and GLS-MPA. LMEDO received an average ranking of 2.5862 on the CEC2018 test suite and obtained a result of 1161/94/143 (+/=/-) on the Wilcoxon rank sum test. In addition, engineering design optimization problems are investigated to further demonstrate the reliability and flexibility of LMEDO. In conclusion, LMEDO is a promising variant of metaheuristic algorithms and is effective and accurate for solving complex problems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.