Balancing Deterministic, Stochastic, and Nature-Inspired Metaheuristics in Budget-Constrained Global Optimization: Theory, Applications, and Cross-Domain Implications

Authors

  • Dr. Lukas Heinrich Müller Department of Industrial Engineering and Systems Optimization Technical University of Munich, Germany Author

Keywords:

Global optimization, metaheuristics, deterministic algorithms, stochastic optimization

Abstract

Global optimization has emerged as a central methodological challenge across engineering, finance, energy systems, and management sciences, particularly in contexts characterized by nonconvex landscapes, high dimensionality, uncertainty, and limited computational or financial budgets. Over the past two decades, the field has witnessed the parallel evolution of deterministic algorithms, stochastic optimization methods, and nature-inspired metaheuristics, each grounded in distinct theoretical assumptions and practical trade-offs. This article develops a comprehensive, theory-driven analysis of the efficiency, robustness, and applicability of these optimization paradigms under constrained evaluation budgets. Drawing strictly on established literature, the study synthesizes insights from comparative global optimization theory, expensive black-box optimization, human- and nature-inspired metaheuristics, and application-driven optimization in energy systems, portfolio management, and index tracking. Rather than offering a superficial comparison, the article deeply interrogates why and how certain classes of algorithms succeed or fail under different structural conditions, including smoothness, uncertainty, sparsity, and real-world constraints. The methodology relies on conceptual synthesis, cross-domain abstraction, and descriptive analytical reasoning rather than mathematical formalism, thereby making the discussion accessible while retaining rigor. The results highlight that no single optimization paradigm dominates universally; instead, efficiency emerges from the alignment between problem structure, information availability, and algorithmic exploration–exploitation balance. The discussion further explores limitations, theoretical tensions between determinism and randomness, and future research directions, particularly in hybrid and adaptive optimization frameworks. By unifying insights from computational optimization and applied decision-making domains, this article contributes a holistic perspective on global optimization under limited budgets, with implications for both theory and practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abernathy, J., & Rakhlin, A. (2008). Competing in the dark: An efficient algorithm for bandit linear optimization. In Proceedings of the Conference on Learning Theory, 263–274.

Agarwal, A., Hazan, E., Kale, S., & Schapire, R. (2006). Algorithms for portfolio management based on the Newton method. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning, 9–16.

Agarwal, A., Negahban, S., & Wainwright, M. J. (2012). Stochastic optimization and sparse statistical recovery: Optimal algorithms for high dimensions. In Proceedings of the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 1547–1555.

CAC Payback Period Optimization Through Automated Cohort Analysis. (2025). International Journal of Management and Business Development, 2(10), 15–20.

Dehghani, M., Malik, O. P., & Montazeri, Z. (2019). Energy commitment: A planning of energy carrier based on energy consumption. Electrical Engineering and Electromechanics, 2019, 69–72.

Dehghani, M., Mardaneh, M., Malik, O. P., Guerrero, J. M., Sotelo, C., Sotelo, D., Nazari-Heris, M., Al-Haddad, K., & Ramirez-Mendoza, R. A. (2020a). Genetic algorithm for energy commitment in a power system supplied by multiple energy carriers. Sustainability, 12, 10053.

Dehghani, M., Mardaneh, M., Malik, O. P., Guerrero, J. M., Morales-Menendez, R., Ramirez-Mendoza, R. A., Matas, J., & Abusorrah, A. (2020b). Energy commitment for a power system supplied by multiple energy carriers system using following optimization algorithm. Applied Sciences, 10, 5862.

Dehghani, M., Trojovská, E., & Trojovský, P. (2022a). A new human-based metaheuristic algorithm for solving optimization problems on the base of simulation of driving training process. Scientific Reports, 12, 9924.

Koc, I., Atay, Y., & Babaoglu, I. (2022). Discrete tree seed algorithm for urban land readjustment. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 112, 104783.

Liberti, L., & Kucherenko, S. (2005). Comparison of deterministic and stochastic approaches to global optimization. International Transactions in Operational Research, 12, 263–285.

Sergeyev, Y. D., Kvasov, D., & Mukhametzhanov, M. (2018). On the efficiency of nature-inspired metaheuristics in expensive global optimization with limited budget. Scientific Reports, 8, 1–9.

Yuen, M.-C., Ng, S.-C., Leung, M.-F., & Che, H. (2022). A metaheuristic-based framework for index tracking with practical constraints. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 8, 4571–4586.

Zeidabadi, F.-A., Dehghani, M., Trojovský, P., Hubálovský, Š., Leiva, V., & Dhiman, G. (2022). Archery Algorithm: A novel stochastic optimization algorithm for solving optimization problems. Computer Modeling in Engineering & Sciences, 72, 399–416.

Downloads

Published

2025-11-30

How to Cite

Balancing Deterministic, Stochastic, and Nature-Inspired Metaheuristics in Budget-Constrained Global Optimization: Theory, Applications, and Cross-Domain Implications . (2025). EuroLexis Research Index of International Multidisciplinary Journal for Research & Development, 12(11), 759-753. https://researchcitations.org/index.php/elriijmrd/article/view/58

Similar Articles

31-40 of 43

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.