Metaheuristic Optimization for Neuromorphic Computing Architectures

Authors

  • Fatemeh Zare Baghiabad * Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ardakan University, Ardakan, Yazd, Iran. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0669-4686
  • Viktor P. Sokolov Department of Computer Science, Kazan Federal University, Kazan, Russia.

https://doi.org/10.48313/maa.vi.83

Abstract

Configuring Spiking Neural Network (SNN) topologies, synaptic parameters, and hardware mappings to minimize energy and latency on event-driven neuromorphic substrates is a decision problem characterized by multimodality, high dimensionality, mixed discrete–continuous variables, and noisy objective evaluations. These properties place the problem beyond the practical reach of classical exact methods and motivate metaheuristic search. This survey synthesizes 95 sources organized into three layers: The metaheuristic methodology itself (evolution-based, swarm-based, physics-based, and human/social-based families, together with hybrid and adaptive schemes), the neuromorphic hardware and SNN training context, and the comparatively sparse intersection literature that applies the former to the latter. Four contributions result: 1) a problem-oriented taxonomy links each algorithmic family to the stages of the neuromorphic design flow, anchored by a formal statement of the architecture optimization problem and a quantitative platform survey, 2) the empirical evidence is consolidated under a uniform assessment protocol—pairwise Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with Holm correction, Friedman ranking with Nemenyi critical-difference analysis, and budget-resolved performance measurement—exposing how strongly reported rankings depend on evaluation budgets, tuning symmetry, and benchmark selection, 3) documented weaknesses in hardware-aware evaluation, noise tolerance, and cross-study reproducibility are traced to their methodological roots, and 4) a five-point research roadmap—surrogate-assisted optimization, Adaptive Operator Selection (AOS), standardized neuromorphic benchmarks, reproducibility safeguards, and algorithm–hardware co-design—formulates concrete actions for each gap. The reviewed evidence indicates that operator-level innovation and methodological discipline, rather than the proliferation of nature-inspired metaphors, offer the most reliable route to gains in energy per inference, synaptic operations, and spike count.

Keywords:

Spiking neural networks, Neuromorphic computing, Metaheuristic optimization, Hardware-aware optimization, Statistical comparison, Energy efficiency

References

  1. [1] Maass, W. (1997). Networks of spiking neurons: The third generation of neural network models. Neural Networks, 10(9), 1659–1671. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0893-6080(97)00011-7
  2. [2] Roy, K., Jaiswal, A., & Panda, P. (2019). Towards spike-based machine intelligence with neuromorphic computing. Nature, 575(7784), 607–617. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1677-2
  3. [3] Merolla, P. A., Arthur, J. V., Alvarez-Icaza, R., Cassidy, A. S., Sawada, J., Akopyan, F., ... & Modha, D. S. (2014). A million spiking-neuron integrated circuit with a scalable communication network and interface. Science, 345(6197), 668-673. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1254642
  4. [4] Esser, S. K., Appuswamy, R., Merolla, P., Arthur, J. V., & Modha, D. S. (2015). Backpropagation for energy-efficient neuromorphic computing. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 28. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1604850113
  5. [5] Davies, M., Srinivasa, N., Lin, T. H., Chinya, G., Cao, Y., Choday, S. H., ... & Wang, H. (2018). Loihi: A neuromorphic manycore processor with on-chip learning. IEEE Micro, 38(1), 82-99. https://doi.org/10.1109/MM.2018.112130359
  6. [6] Furber, S. (2016). Large-scale neuromorphic computing systems. Journal of Neural Engineering, 13(5), 51001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2560/13/5/051001
  7. [7] Eshraghian, J. K., Ward, M., Neftci, E. O., Wang, X., Lenz, G., Dwivedi, G., ... & Lu, W. D. (2023). Training spiking neural networks using lessons from deep learning. Proceedings of the IEEE, 111(9), 1016-1054. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2023.3308088
  8. [8] Kosta, A. K., Roy, K., Sengupta, A., Chakraborty, I., Panda, P., Rathi, N., & Ankit, A. (2021). Exploring neuromorphic computing based on spiking neural networks: Algorithms to hardware. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(12), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1145/3571155
  9. [9] Boussaïd, I., Lepagnot, J., & Siarry, P. (2013). A survey on optimization metaheuristics. Information Sciences, 237, 82-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2013.02.041
  10. [10] Mirjalili, S., Dong, J. S., & Lewis, A. (2020). Nature-inspired optimizers. Studies in Computational Intelligence, 811, 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12127-3
  11. [11] Osman, I. H., & Laporte, G. (1996). Metaheuristics: A bibliography. Annals of Operations Research, 63(5), 511–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02125421
  12. [12] Davis, L. (1991). Handbook of genetic algorithms. Van Nostrand Reinhold. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Handbook-Of-Genetic-Algorithms-Davis/54acdb67ca083326c34eabdeb59bfdc01c748df0
  13. [13] Stanley, K. O., & Miikkulainen, R. (2002). Evolving neural networks through augmenting topologies. Evolutionary Computation, 10(2), 99–127. https://doi.org/10.1162/106365602320169811
  14. [14] Sörensen, K. (2015). Metaheuristics—The metaphor exposed. International Transactions in Operational Research, 22(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.12001
  15. [15] Campelo, F., & Aranha, C. (2023). Lessons from the evolutionary computation bestiary. Artificial Life, 29(4), 421–432. https://doi.org/10.1162/artl_a_00402
  16. [16] Wolpert, D. H., & Macready, W. G. (1997). No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.585893
  17. [17] Droste, S., Jansen, T., & Wegener, I. (2002). Optimization with randomized search heuristics—The (A) NFL theorem, realistic scenarios, and difficult functions. Theoretical Computer Science, 287(1), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3975(02)00094-4
  18. [18] Wilcoxon, F. (1945). Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin, 1(6), 80–83. https://doi.org/10.2307/3001968
  19. [19] Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6(2), 65–70. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4615733
  20. [20] Friedman, M. (1937). The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 32(200), 675–701. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/01621459.1937.10503522
  21. [21] Demšar, J. (2006). Statistical comparisons of classifiers over multiple data sets. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 7(Jan), 1–30. https://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume7/demsar06a/demsar06a.pdf
  22. [22] Hansen, N., Auger, A., Ros, R., Mersmann, O., Tušar, T., & Brockhoff, D. (2021). COCO: A platform for comparing continuous optimizers in a black-box setting. Optimization Methods and Software, 36(1), 114–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10556788.2020.1808977
  23. [23] Bohte, S. M., Kok, J. N., & La Poutre, H. (2002). Error-backpropagation in temporally encoded networks of spiking neurons. Neurocomputing, 48(1–4), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-2312(01)00658-0
  24. [24] Rueckauer, B., Lungu, I. A., Hu, Y., Pfeiffer, M., & Liu, S. C. (2017). Conversion of continuous-valued deep networks to efficient event-driven networks for image classification. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 11, 682. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00682
  25. [25] Bi, G., & Poo, M. (1998). Synaptic modifications in cultured hippocampal neurons: Dependence on spike timing, synaptic strength, and postsynaptic cell type. The Journal of Neuroscience, 18(24), 10464–10472. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI
  26. [26] Song, S., Miller, K. D., & Abbott, L. F. (2000). Competitive Hebbian learning through spike-timing-dependent synaptic plasticity. Nature Neuroscience, 3(9), 919–926. https://doi.org/10.1038/78829
  27. [27] Diehl, P. U., & Cook, M. (2015). Unsupervised learning of digit recognition using spike-timing-dependent plasticity. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 9, 99. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2015.00099
  28. [28] Qiao, N., Mostafa, H., Corradi, F., Osswald, M., Stefanini, F., Sumislawska, D., & Indiveri, G. (2015). A reconfigurable on-line learning spiking neuromorphic processor comprising 256 neurons and 128K synapses. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 9, 141. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2015.00141
  29. [29] Pehle, C., Billaudelle, S., Cramer, B., Kaiser, J., Schreiber, K., Stradmann, Y., ... & Schemmel, J. (2022). The BrainScaleS-2 accelerated neuromorphic system with hybrid plasticity. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 16, 795876. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.795876
  30. [30] Davies, M., Wild, A., Orchard, G., Sandamirskaya, Y., Guerra, G. A. F., Joshi, P., ... & Risbud, S. R. (2021). Advancing neuromorphic computing with Loihi: A survey of results and outlook. Proceedings of the IEEE, 109(5), 911-934. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2021.2507580
  31. [31] Schemmel, J., Brüderle, D., Grübl, A., Hock, M., Meier, K., & Millner, S. (2010). A wafer-scale neuromorphic hardware system for large-scale neural modeling. 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS) (pp. 1947-1950). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBCAS.2010.2053773
  32. [32] Benjamin, B. V., Gao, P., McQuinn, E., Choudhary, S., Chandrasekaran, A. R., Bussat, J. M., ... & Boahen, K. (2014). Neurogrid: A mixed-analog-digital multichip system for large-scale neural simulations. Proceedings of the IEEE, 102(5), 699-716. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2014.2313565
  33. [33] Pei, J., Deng, L., Song, S., Zhao, M., Zhang, Y., Wu, S., Wang, G., Zou, Z., Wu, Z., He, W., … & Shi, L. (2019). Towards artificial general intelligence with hybrid Tianjic chip architecture. Nature, 572(7767), 106–111. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1424-8
  34. [34] Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., & Meyarivan, T. (2002). A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(2), 182–197. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.996017
  35. [35] Zhang, Q., & Li, H. (2007). MOEA/D: A multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 11(6), 712–731. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2007.892759
  36. [36] Hansen, N., & Ostermeier, A. (2001). Completely derandomized self-adaptation in evolution strategies. Evolutionary Computation, 9(2), 159–195. https://doi.org/10.1162/106365601750190398
  37. [37] Deb, K. (2000). An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithms. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 186(2–4), 311–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(99)00389-8
  38. [38] Coello, C. A. C. (2002). Theoretical and numerical constraint-handling techniques used with evolutionary algorithms: A survey of the state of the art. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 191(11–12), 1245–1287. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(01)00323-1
  39. [39] Liu, H., Simonyan, K., & Yang, Y. (2018). Darts: Differentiable architecture search. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1806.09055
  40. [40] Tan, M., Chen, B., Pang, R., Vasudevan, V., Sandler, M., Howard, A., & Le, Q. V. (2019). Mnasnet: Platform-aware neural architecture search for mobile. 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (pp. 2815-2823). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2019.00293
  41. [41] Snoek, J., Larochelle, H., & Adams, R. (2012). Practical bayesian optimization of machine learning algorithms. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 25. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2012/hash/05311655a15b75fab86956663e1819cd-Abstract.html
  42. [42] Mezura-Montes, E., & Coello, C. A. C. (2011). Constraint-handling in nature-inspired numerical optimization: Past, present and future. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 1(4), 173–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2011.10.001
  43. [43] Holland, J. H. (1975). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: An introductory analysis with applications to biology. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1090.001.0001
  44. [44] 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
  45. [45] Qin, A. K., Huang, V. L., & Suganthan, P. N. (2008). Differential evolution algorithm with strategy adaptation for global numerical optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 13(2), 398–417. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2008.927706
  46. [46] Zhang, J., & Sanderson, A. C. (2009). JADE: Adaptive differential evolution with optional external archive. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 13(5), 945–958. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2009.2014613
  47. [47] Tanabe, R., & Fukunaga, A. (2013). Success-history based parameter adaptation for differential evolution. 2013 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (pp. 71-78). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2013.6557555
  48. [48] Tanabe, R., & Fukunaga, A. S. (2014). Improving the search performance of SHADE using linear population size reduction. 2014 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC) (pp. 1658-1665). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2014.6900380
  49. [49] Simon, D. (2008). Biogeography-based optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 12(6), 702–713. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2008.919004
  50. [50] 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
  51. [51] 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.
  52. [52] Karaboga, D., & Basturk, B. (2007). A powerful and efficient algorithm for numerical function optimization: Artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm. Journal of Global Optimization, 39(3), 459–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10898-007-9149-x
  53. [53] Mirjalili, S., Mirjalili, S. M., & Lewis, A. (2014). Grey wolf optimizer. Advances in Engineering Software, 69, 46-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007
  54. [54] Mirjalili, S., & Lewis, A. (2016). The whale optimization algorithm. Advances in Engineering Software, 95, 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2016.01.008
  55. [55] Mirjalili, S. (2015). The ant lion optimizer. Advances in Engineering Software, 83, 80–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2015.01.010
  56. [56] Mirjalili, S. (2015). Moth-flame optimization algorithm: A novel nature-inspired heuristic paradigm. Knowledge-Based Systems, 89, 228–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.07.006
  57. [57] Mirjalili, S. (2016). SCA: A sine cosine algorithm for solving optimization problems. Knowledge-Based Systems, 96, 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.12.022
  58. [58] Mirjalili, S. (2016). Dragonfly algorithm: A new meta-heuristic optimization technique for solving single-objective, discrete, and multi-objective problems. Neural Computing and Applications, 27(4), 1053–1073. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-1920-1
  59. [59] Mirjalili, S., Gandomi, A. H., Mirjalili, S. Z., Saremi, S., Faris, H., & Mirjalili, S. M. (2017). Salp swarm algorithm: A bio-inspired optimizer for engineering design problems. Advances in Engineering Software, 114, 163–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.07.002
  60. [60] Saremi, S., Mirjalili, S., & Lewis, A. (2017). Grasshopper optimisation algorithm: Theory and application. Advances in Engineering Software, 105, 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.01.004
  61. [61] Heidari, A. A., Mirjalili, S., Faris, H., Aljarah, I., Mafarja, M., & Chen, H. (2019). Harris Hawks optimization: Algorithm and applications. Future Generation Computer Systems, 97, 849–872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2019.02.028
  62. [62] Passino, K. M. (2002). Biomimicry of bacterial foraging for distributed optimization and control. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 22(3), 52–67. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCS.2002.1004010
  63. [63] Yang, X. S., & Deb, S. (2009). Cuckoo search via Lévy flights. 2009 World Congress on Nature & Biologically Inspired Computing (NaBIC) (pp. 210-214). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/NABIC.2009.5393690
  64. [64] Abualigah, L., Yousri, D., Abd Elaziz, M., Ewees, A. A., Al-Qaness, M. A. A., & Gandomi, A. H. (2021). Aquila optimizer: A novel meta-heuristic optimization algorithm. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 157, 107250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107250
  65. [65] Alimoradi, M., Azgomi, H., & Asghari, A. (2022). Trees social relations optimization algorithm: A new swarm-based metaheuristic technique to solve continuous and discrete optimization problems. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 194, 629–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2021.12.010
  66. [66] Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D., Jr., & Vecchi, M. P. (1983). Optimization by simulated annealing. Science, 220(4598), 671–680. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.220.4598.671
  67. [67] Rashedi, E., Nezamabadi-Pour, H., & Saryazdi, S. (2009). GSA: A gravitational search algorithm. Information Sciences, 179(13), 2232–2248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2009.03.004
  68. [68] Yang, X. S. (2009). Firefly algorithms for multimodal optimization. International Symposium on Stochastic Algorithms (pp. 169-178). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04944-6_14
  69. [69] Yang, X. S. (2010). A new metaheuristic bat-inspired algorithm. In Nature Inspired Cooperative Strategies for Optimization (NICSO) (pp. 65–74). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12538-6_6
  70. [70] Yang, X. S. (2012). Flower pollination algorithm for global optimization. International Conference on Unconventional Computing and Natural Computation (pp. 240-249). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32894-7_27
  71. [71] Eskandar, H., Sadollah, A., Bahreininejad, A., & Hamdi, M. (2012). Water cycle algorithm-A novel metaheuristic optimization method for solving constrained engineering optimization problems. Computers & Structures, 110, 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2012.07.010
  72. [72] Faramarzi, A., Heidarinejad, M., Stephens, B., & Mirjalili, S. (2020). Equilibrium optimizer: A novel optimization algorithm. Knowledge-Based Systems, 191, 105190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2019.105190
  73. [73] Mirjalili, S., Mirjalili, S. M., & Hatamlou, A. (2016). Multi-verse optimizer: A nature-inspired algorithm for global optimization. Neural Computing and Applications, 27(2), 495–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-1870-7
  74. [74] Al-Madi, N., Faris, H., & Mirjalili, S. (2019). Binary multi-verse optimization algorithm for global optimization and discrete problems. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics, 10(12), 3445–3465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-019-00931-8
  75. [75] Daliri, A., Asghari, A., Azgomi, H., & Alimoradi, M. (2022). The water optimization algorithm: A novel metaheuristic for solving optimization problems. Applied Intelligence, 52(15), 17990–18029. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-022-03397-4
  76. [76] Rao, R. V., Savsani, V. J., & Vakharia, D. P. (2011). Teaching-learning-based optimization: A novel method for constrained mechanical design optimization problems. Computer-Aided Design, 43(3), 303–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2010.12.015
  77. [77] Liang, J. J., Qu, B. Y., & Suganthan, P. N. (2013). Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2014 special session and competition on single objective real-parameter numerical optimization. Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou China and Technical Report, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, 635(2), 2014. https://bee22.com/manual/tf_images/Liang CEC2014.pdf
  78. [78] Kumar, A., Price, K. V., Mohamed, A. W., Hadi, A. A., & Suganthan, P. N. (2021). Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2022 special session and competition on single objective bound constrained numerical optimization. Nanyang Technological University. file:///C:/Users/Admin/Downloads/CEC2022 TR (1).pdf
  79. [79] Werth, B., Pitzer, E., Ostermayer, G., & Affenzeller, M. (2018). Quasi-bistability of walk-based landscape measures in stochastic fitness landscapes. Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (pp. 1087-1094). Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). https://doi.org/10.1145/3205455.3205471
  80. [80] Črepinšek, M., Liu, S. H., & Mernik, M. (2013). Exploration and exploitation in evolutionary algorithms: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 45(3), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/2480741.2480752
  81. [81] Pham, H. N. A., Shr, A., Chen, P. P., & Liu, A. (2008). Scheduling for dedicated machine constraint using integer programming. 2008 20th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 499-506). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTAI.2008.85
  82. [82] Eiben, Á. E., Hinterding, R., & Michalewicz, Z. (1999). Parameter control in evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 3(2), 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.771166
  83. [83] Karafotias, G., Hoogendoorn, M., & Eiben, Á. E. (2014). Parameter control in evolutionary algorithms: Trends and challenges. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 19(2), 167–187. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2014.2308294
  84. [84] Rice, J. R. (1976). The algorithm selection problem. In Advances in computers (Vol. 15, pp. 65–118). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2458(08)60520-3
  85. [85] Muñoz, M. A., Sun, Y., Kirley, M., & Halgamuge, S. K. (2015). Algorithm selection for black-box continuous optimization problems: A survey on methods and challenges. Information Sciences, 317, 224–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2015.05.010
  86. [86] Kerschke, P., Hoos, H. H., Neumann, F., & Trautmann, H. (2019). Automated algorithm selection: Survey and perspectives. Evolutionary Computation, 27(1), 3–45. https://doi.org/10.1162/evco_a_00242
  87. [87] Orchard, G., Jayawant, A., Cohen, G. K., & Thakor, N. (2015). Converting static image datasets to spiking neuromorphic datasets using saccades. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 9, 437. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2015.00437
  88. [88] Amir, A., Taba, B., Berg, D., Melano, T., McKinstry, J., Di Nolfo, C., ... & Modha, D. (2017). A low power, fully event-based gesture recognition system. 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (pp. 7388-7397). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2017.781
  89. [89] Cramer, B., Stradmann, Y., Schemmel, J., & Zenke, F. (2020). The heidelberg spiking data sets for the systematic evaluation of spiking neural networks. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 33(7), 2744–2757. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2020.3044364
  90. [90] 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
  91. [91] Sobol, I. M. (2001). Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 55(1–3), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4754(00)00270-6
  92. [92] Anderson-Cook, C. M. (2005). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100(470), 708. https://doi.org/10.1198/jasa.2005.s22
  93. [93] Jin, Y., Wang, H., Chugh, T., Guo, D., & Miettinen, K. (2018). Data-driven evolutionary optimization: An overview and case studies. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 23(3), 442–458. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2018.2869001
  94. [94] Zitzler, E., & Thiele, L. (1999). Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: A comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 3(4), 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.797969
  95. [95] Yik, J., Van den Berghe, K., Den Blanken, D., Bouhadjar, Y., Fabre, M., Hueber, P., ... & Reddi, V. J. (2025). The neurobench framework for benchmarking neuromorphic computing algorithms and systems. Nature Communications, 16(1), 1545. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-56739-4

Published

2026-06-03

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): Metaheuristic Algorithms with Applications (MAA)

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Zare Baghiabad, F. ., & Sokolov, V. P. . (2026). Metaheuristic Optimization for Neuromorphic Computing Architectures. Metaheuristic Algorithms With Applications, 3(2), 195-216. https://doi.org/10.48313/maa.vi.83

Similar Articles

1-10 of 68

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