ArticleScientific reports2025
A multistrategy improved hunger games search algorithm.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a multistrategy improved Hunger Games Search (MHGS) algorithm to address several inherent limitations of the original HGS, including imbalanced exploration and exploitation, insufficient population diversity, and premature convergence. The main contributions of MHGS are fourfold: (1) a phased position update framework that dynamically coordinates global exploration and local exploitation through three distinct search phases; (2) an enhanced reproduction operator inspired by biological reproductive patterns to preserve population diversity; (3) an adaptive boundary handling mechanism that redirects out-of-bounds individuals to promising regions, thus improving search efficiency; and (4) an elite dynamic oppositional learning strategy with self-adjusting coefficients to enhance the algorithm's ability to avoid local optima. These mechanisms work synergistically: the phased update balances global and local search, while the reproduction and boundary handling strategies jointly maintain solution diversity. The addition of oppositional learning further improves the robustness of the search process. Extensive evaluations on 23 benchmark functions, the CEC2017 test suite, and two engineering design problems demonstrate that MHGS achieves a 23.7% average improvement in accuracy compared to seven state-of-the-art algorithms (Wilcoxon rank-sum test, p < 0.05). Moreover, a binary variant, BMHGS_V3, using sigmoid transformation, attains an average classification accuracy of 92.3% on ten UCI datasets for feature selection tasks. The proposed MHGS algorithm provides a novel and effective framework for solving complex optimization problems, demonstrating significant theoretical and practical value in the field of computational intelligence.
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.