RESUMO
This study is presented to examine the performance of a newly proposed metaheuristic algorithm within discrete and continuous search spaces. Therefore, the multithresholding image segmentation problem and parameter estimation problem of both the proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) and photovoltaic (PV) models, which have different search spaces, are used to test and verify this algorithm. The traditional techniques could not find approximate solutions for those problems in a reasonable amount of time, so researchers have used metaheuristic algorithms to overcome those shortcomings. However, the majority of metaheuristic algorithms still suffer from slow convergence speed and stagnation into local minima problems, which makes them unsuitable for tackling these optimization problems. Therefore, this study proposes an improved nutcracker optimization algorithm (INOA) for better solving those problems in an acceptable amount of time. INOA is based on improving the performance of the standard algorithm using a newly proposed convergence improvement strategy that aims to improve the convergence speed and prevent stagnation in local minima. This algorithm is first applied to estimating the unknown parameters of the single-diode, double-diode, and triple-diode models for a PV module and a solar cell. Second, four PEMFC modules are used to further observe INOA's performance for the continuous optimization challenge. Finally, the performance of INOA is investigated for solving the multi-thresholding image segmentation problem to test its effectiveness in a discrete search space. Several test images with different threshold levels were used to validate its effectiveness, stability, and scalability. Comparison to several rival optimizers using various performance indicators, such as convergence curve, standard deviation, average fitness value, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test, demonstrates that INOA is an effective alternative for solving both discrete and continuous optimization problems. Quantitively, INOA could solve those problems better than the other rival optimizers, with improvement rates for final results ranging between 0.8355 % and 3.34 % for discrete problems and 4.97 % and 99.9 % for continuous problems.