Clonal Suppression and Hypermutation: An Artificial Immune System for Transcriptomic Biomarker Mining

Authors

https://doi.org/10.48313/maa.vi.112

Abstract

This paper introduces CSH-AIS, a novel metaheuristic optimization algorithm designed to address Riemannian manifold-constrained optimization problems arising in transcriptomic biomarker mining. The proposed approach leverages the clonal selection principle and idiotypic suppression mechanism of the Artificial Immune System (AIS) paradigm to achieve robust and efficient performance across diverse problem instances. Unlike existing methods that rely on fixed search operators and static parameter configurations, CSH-AIS incorporates adaptive mechanisms that dynamically adjust the search strategy based on real-time landscape analysis. We provide a rigorous theoretical framework establishing convergence guarantees under mild assumptions, along with a detailed complexity analysis demonstrating the algorithm's computational efficiency. The experimental evaluation employs a comprehensive multi-faceted protocol, including wall-clock profiling, Floating-Point Operations (FLOPs) counting, cache analysis, and parallelization scaling, featuring fine-grained computational cost decomposition. In total, 19 distinct test configurations are evaluated, encompassing hyperparameter sensitivity (One-At-a-Time (OAT), Morris elementary effects, and Sobol indices), scalability across dimensions D = {10, 30, 50, 100, 200, 500, 1000}, noisy-fitness robustness under Gaussian perturbations (σ = 0.01–0.5), CEC 2017 and CEC 2020 benchmark suites, four real-world engineering design problems, parallelization efficiency on up to 32 cores, cross-domain generalization across 30 diverse problems, convergence-phase analysis, population-diversity tracking, operator-selection frequency analysis, multiple-comparison procedures [1–3], effect-size analysis (Cohen's d, Cliff's delta, Hedges' g, Glass's Δ), run-to-run variability, comparison with 2023–2024 algorithms, Lévy-flight step-size analysis, constraint-repair effectiveness, statistical power analysis, and theoretical-bound validation. Statistical significance is assessed using the Kruskal-Wallis test with Dunn's post-hoc procedure, complemented by Wilcoxon signed-rank pairwise tests with Holm-Bonferroni correction. Results demonstrate that CSH-AIS achieves statistically significant improvements over nine state-of-the-art baselines, with an average performance gain of 22.5% and large effect sizes (Cohen's d > 0.8). Ablation studies confirm the contribution of each algorithmic component, and sensitivity analysis identifies the most influential parameters. The framework is validated on real-world problem instances, demonstrating practical applicability and robustness under varying conditions.

Keywords:

CSH-AIS, Riemannian manifold-constrained optimization, Artificial immune system, Clonal selection, Idiotypic suppression, Hypermutation, Transcriptomic biomarker mining, Lévy flight

References

  1. [1] Finner, H. (1993). On a monotonicity problem in step-down multiple test procedures. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88(423), 920–923. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1993.10476358

  2. [2] Hochberg, Y. (1988). A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika, 75(4), 800–802. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/75.4.800

  3. [3] Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6(2), 65–70. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4615733

  4. [4] Moscato, P. (1989). On evolution, search, optimization, genetic algorithms and martial arts: Towards memetic algorithms. Caltech Concurrent Computation Program, C3P Report, 826(1989), 37. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2354457_On_Evolution_Search_Optimization_Genetic_Algorithms_and_Martial_Arts_-_Towards_Memetic_Algorithms

  5. [5] Ong, Y. S., & Keane, A. J. (2004). Meta-Lamarckian learning in memetic algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 8(2), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-013-1160-1

  6. [6] Holland, J. H. (1992). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: An introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence. MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262082136/adaptation-in-natural-and-artificial-systems/

  7. [7] Storn, R., & Price, K. (1997). Differential evolution-A simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. Journal of Global Optimization, 11(4), 341–359. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008202821328

  8. [8] Kennedy, J., & Eberhart, R. (1995). Particle swarm optimization. Proceedings of ICNN'95-International Conference on Neural Networks (Vol. 4, pp. 1942-1948). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNN.1995.488968

  9. [9] Dorigo, M., Maniezzo, V., & Colorni, A. (1996). Ant system: Optimization by a colony of cooperating agents. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics), 26(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1109/3477.484436

  10. [10] Mirjalili, S., Mirjalili, S. M., & Lewis, A. (2014). Grey wolf optimizer. Advances in Engineering Software, 69, 46-61. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007

  11. [11] Derrac, J., García, S., Molina, D., & Herrera, F. (2011). A practical tutorial on the use of nonparametric statistical tests as a methodology for comparing evolutionary and swarm intelligence algorithms. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2011.02.002

  12. [12] Dunn, O. J. (1964). Multiple comparisons using rank sums. Technometrics, 6(3), 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1964.10490181

  13. [13] Khishe, M., & Mosavi, M. R. (2020). Chimp optimization algorithm. Expert Systems with Applications, 149, 113338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113338

  14. [14] Hashim, F. A., Houssein, E. H., Hussain, K., Mabrouk, M. S., & Al-Atabany, W. (2022). Honey badger algorithm: New metaheuristic algorithm for solving optimization problems. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 192, 84–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2021.08.013

  15. [15] Agushaka, J. O., Ezugwu, A. E., & Abualigah, L. (2022). Dwarf mongoose optimization algorithm. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 391, 114570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2022.114570

  16. [16] Asghari, A., Zeinalabedinmalekmian, M., Azgomi, H., Alimoradi, M., & Ghaziantafrishi, S. (2025). Farmer ants optimization algorithm: A novel metaheuristic for solving discrete optimization problems. Information, 16(3), 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16030207

Published

2026-03-06

How to Cite

Alipoor, B., & Fakheri, S. . (2026). Clonal Suppression and Hypermutation: An Artificial Immune System for Transcriptomic Biomarker Mining. Metaheuristic Algorithms With Applications, 3(1), 111-140. https://doi.org/10.48313/maa.vi.112

Similar Articles

1-10 of 64

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