A Quantum-Driven Evolutionary Framework for Solving High-Dimensional Sharpe Ratio Portfolio Optimization

Adam Slowik; Haorui Yang; Jiaqi Zhang; Jing Xu; Jun Zhang; Mingyang Yu

arxiv: 2601.11029 · v3 · submitted 2026-01-16 · 💻 cs.NE

A Quantum-Driven Evolutionary Framework for Solving High-Dimensional Sharpe Ratio Portfolio Optimization

Mingyang Yu , Jiaqi Zhang , Haorui Yang , Adam Slowik , Jun Zhang , Jing Xu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 14:12 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.NE

keywords Sharpe ratio portfolio optimizationquantum hybrid differential evolutionhigh-dimensional optimizationevolutionary algorithmsconstraint penalty termsquantum tunnelingCEC benchmarksreal-world portfolios

0 comments

The pith

A quantum hybrid differential evolution algorithm solves high-dimensional Sharpe ratio portfolio optimization with up to 96.6 percent better performance than prior methods.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper first converts the constrained Sharpe ratio portfolio problem into an unconstrained one by folding all constraints into the objective via adaptive penalty terms. It then introduces the QHDE algorithm, which adds a dynamic quantum tunneling step so individuals can jump out of local optima, a good-point-set chaos reverse learning step for diverse initialization, and a dynamic elite pool with Cauchy-Gaussian perturbations to sustain variety. On CEC benchmark functions and real portfolios of 20 to 80 assets, QHDE reaches higher final Sharpe values, converges faster, and proves more stable than seven existing evolutionary and swarm algorithms. A sympathetic reader cares because the approach offers a practical way to handle the combinatorial explosion that appears once realistic constraints and dozens of assets are included, without needing custom tuning for each new market.

Core claim

The central claim is that the Quantum Hybrid Differential Evolution (QHDE) algorithm, built around a dynamic quantum tunneling mechanism, good point set-chaos reverse learning initialization, and a dynamic elite pool with Cauchy-Gaussian hybrid perturbations, delivers up to 96.6 percent performance gains over seven state-of-the-art methods when solving the penalty-augmented Sharpe ratio portfolio model on both CEC test functions and real-world instances with 20 to 80 assets.

What carries the argument

Dynamic quantum tunneling mechanism that lets population members probabilistically escape local optima while the surrounding evolutionary operators maintain diversity.

If this is right

Portfolio managers can treat the original constrained problem as a standard single-objective optimization task while still respecting all financial limits.
The same algorithmic structure can be applied directly to other high-dimensional financial allocation tasks that share similar constraint patterns.
Faster convergence reduces the wall-clock time required to rebalance large portfolios in live trading environments.
Higher solution precision produces allocation vectors whose realized risk-return ratios more closely match the theoretical optimum.
Greater robustness across repeated runs lowers the chance that a single poor random seed yields an unacceptable portfolio.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The penalty-adaptation idea could be reused in other constrained financial problems such as index tracking or risk-parity allocation without inventing new constraint-handling schemes.
If the tunneling probability schedule proves stable, the same operator might be dropped into other differential-evolution variants used for engineering design or neural-architecture search.
Testing the method on portfolios with several hundred assets would reveal whether the diversity mechanisms continue to scale before the curse of dimensionality dominates.
Replacing the Cauchy-Gaussian perturbations with learned distributions from historical return data could further tighten the gap between simulated and live performance.

Load-bearing premise

The dynamic quantum tunneling and hybrid perturbations will reliably let the population escape local optima and stay diverse on any high-dimensional portfolio landscape without needing problem-specific retuning.

What would settle it

Run QHDE and the seven comparison algorithms on a fresh collection of 50-asset real-market instances with the same constraints; if QHDE no longer shows both faster convergence and higher final Sharpe ratios on a majority of the instances, the superiority claim is falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.11029 by Adam Slowik, Haorui Yang, Jiaqi Zhang, Jing Xu, Jun Zhang, Mingyang Yu.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Flow chart of QHDE P Zm = (P Z1 + P Z2 + P Z3) 3 (17) Next, these three top individuals, along with their average position, are included in Elitep. During each iteration, a position is randomly selected from Elitep as a reference point to guide the movement direction of individuals. Cauchy-Gaussian mutation is a hybrid mutation method that combines the long-tail characteristics of the Cauchy distribution … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Ranking distribution of different algorithms on CEC 2022. (a) Dim = 10, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Box plots of QHDE and other algorithms on CEC 2022 functions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Ablation experiment on CEC 2020. Strategy 3 (mixed perturbation) shows increased efficacy in high-dimensional scenarios. Its synergy with Strategy 2 enables QHDE and QHDE23 to maintain superior optimization stability and global search capability as problem complexity scales. 4.4 Portfolio selection This section evaluates QHDE across four portfolio selection problems (comprising 20, 40, 60, and 80 stocks)… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Evaluation and comparison of QHDE applied to 80 stocks alongside other [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

High-dimensional portfolio optimization faces significant computational challenges under complex constraints, with traditional optimization methods struggling to balance convergence speed and global exploration capability. To address this, firstly, we introduce an enhanced Sharpe ratio-based model that incorporates all constraints into the objective function using adaptive penalty terms, transforming the original constrained problem into an unconstrained single-objective formulation. This approach preserves financial interpretability while simplifying algorithmic implementation. To efficiently solve the resulting high-dimensional optimization problem, we develop a Quantum Hybrid Differential Evolution (QHDE) algorithm, which introduces a dynamic quantum tunneling mechanism that enables individuals to probabilistically escape local optima, dramatically enhancing global exploration and solution flexibility. To further improve performance, a good point set-chaos reverse learning strategy generates a well-dispersed initial population, providing a robust and diverse starting point. Meanwhile, a dynamic elite pool combined with Cauchy-Gaussian hybrid perturbations maintains population diversity and mitigates premature convergence, ensuring stable and high-quality solutions. Experimental validation on CEC benchmarks and real-world portfolios involving 20 to 80 assets demonstrates that QHDE's performance improves by up to 96.6%. It attains faster convergence, higher solution precision, and greater robustness than seven state-of-the-art counterparts, thereby confirming its suitability for complex, high-dimensional portfolio optimization.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

QHDE combines quantum tunneling with DE operators for constrained Sharpe optimization, but missing equal-budget controls and stats make the 96.6% gains hard to trust.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this paper introduces QHDE, a differential evolution variant that adds dynamic quantum tunneling for escaping local optima, good-point-set chaos initialization, and Cauchy-Gaussian perturbations on a dynamic elite pool. It also folds all portfolio constraints into the objective via adaptive penalties, turning the Sharpe ratio problem into an unconstrained single-objective task. That combination is presented as a fresh synthesis rather than a direct lift from earlier DE or quantum-inspired work, and the tests cover both CEC benchmarks and real portfolios with 20 to 80 assets. If the mechanisms deliver what is claimed, the framework could be a useful practical tool for this specific finance setting. The description of how the operators interact to maintain diversity and speed convergence is clear enough to follow. The soft spots sit in the experimental reporting. The headline performance lift of up to 96.6% over seven baselines is difficult to interpret without confirmation that every method received the same number of function evaluations. The abstract gives no error bars, no statistical tests, and no ablation results that would show which component actually drives the improvement. Those gaps leave open the possibility that the reported edge comes from unequal search effort or tuning rather than the new operators. This paper is aimed at researchers who tune evolutionary algorithms for constrained financial optimization problems. A reader already working on metaheuristics for portfolio selection would find the operator details and the unconstrained reformulation worth examining. It is coherent on its own terms and engages the relevant literature without obvious internal contradictions, so it deserves a serious referee. The review can focus on tightening the experimental controls and adding the missing statistics, which should be straightforward fixes.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces an enhanced Sharpe ratio portfolio optimization model that folds all constraints into the objective via adaptive penalty terms, converting the problem to unconstrained form. It proposes the Quantum Hybrid Differential Evolution (QHDE) algorithm, which adds a dynamic quantum tunneling mechanism for escaping local optima, a good-point-set chaos reverse-learning initialization strategy, and a dynamic elite pool using Cauchy-Gaussian hybrid perturbations. Experiments on CEC benchmarks and real portfolios (20–80 assets) claim up to 96.6 % performance gains, faster convergence, higher precision, and greater robustness versus seven state-of-the-art methods.

Significance. If the superiority claims survive controlled re-evaluation with equal function-evaluation budgets and statistical validation, the work would strengthen the case for quantum-inspired operators in high-dimensional constrained financial optimization. The explicit penalty formulation and hybrid perturbation scheme are concrete contributions that could be adopted or extended by the evolutionary-computation community working on portfolio problems.

major comments (2)

[Experimental Validation] Experimental Validation section: the comparisons with the seven baselines do not state that all algorithms received identical function-evaluation budgets, population sizes, or generation limits. Without this control the reported 96.6 % improvement cannot be attributed to the dynamic quantum tunneling or Cauchy-Gaussian perturbations rather than unequal search effort.
[Results] Results section: performance figures are presented without error bars, standard deviations, or statistical significance tests (Wilcoxon, Friedman, or t-tests) across multiple independent runs. This omission undermines the robustness and superiority claims for both CEC and real-world instances.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: the phrase 'performance improves by up to 96.6 %' should specify the exact metric (e.g., Sharpe ratio, return, or risk) and the baseline against which the percentage is computed.
[Methodology] Methodology: the adaptive penalty coefficients are described only qualitatively; explicit update rules or pseudocode would improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. The comments on experimental controls and statistical validation are well-taken and will be addressed directly in the revision to strengthen the claims of superiority.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Experimental Validation] Experimental Validation section: the comparisons with the seven baselines do not state that all algorithms received identical function-evaluation budgets, population sizes, or generation limits. Without this control the reported 96.6 % improvement cannot be attributed to the dynamic quantum tunneling or Cauchy-Gaussian perturbations rather than unequal search effort.

Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript did not explicitly document identical experimental budgets across algorithms. In the revised version we will insert a new subsection (and accompanying table) that lists the shared settings: population size of 50, maximum generations of 200, and a uniform function-evaluation limit of 10,000 × D for every method and every problem dimension. With these controls now stated, the reported gains can be attributed to the dynamic quantum tunneling and hybrid perturbation operators rather than unequal search effort. revision: yes
Referee: [Results] Results section: performance figures are presented without error bars, standard deviations, or statistical significance tests (Wilcoxon, Friedman, or t-tests) across multiple independent runs. This omission undermines the robustness and superiority claims for both CEC and real-world instances.

Authors: We agree that the absence of variability measures and formal statistical tests limits the strength of the robustness claims. The revised manuscript will report mean and standard deviation of the Sharpe ratio over 30 independent runs for all algorithms and instances. We will also add Wilcoxon signed-rank tests for pairwise comparisons and a Friedman test with Nemenyi post-hoc analysis, presenting the resulting p-values and rankings in updated tables. These additions will substantiate the superiority claims with statistical evidence. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in algorithmic construction or derivation chain

full rationale

The paper presents an enhanced Sharpe ratio model via adaptive penalty terms and a QHDE algorithm whose components (dynamic quantum tunneling, good point set-chaos reverse learning, dynamic elite pool with Cauchy-Gaussian perturbations) are introduced as explicit novel mechanisms rather than quantities derived from fitted parameters, self-referential equations, or prior self-citations. No step reduces a claimed result to its own inputs by construction; performance claims rest on external experimental comparisons against baselines. The derivation is therefore self-contained as an algorithmic proposal.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 0 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the effectiveness of several introduced algorithmic components whose exact parameter settings and interaction rules are not fully specified in the abstract; adaptive penalty coefficients and tunneling probability are likely free parameters tuned during development.

free parameters (2)

adaptive penalty coefficients
Coefficients that scale constraint violations inside the objective function; their adaptation rule and initial values are not detailed and must be chosen or fitted for each problem class.
quantum tunneling probability
Probability controlling the escape step; appears as a tunable hyper-parameter whose value affects global exploration claims.

invented entities (1)

dynamic quantum tunneling mechanism no independent evidence
purpose: Probabilistic escape from local optima within the evolutionary population
New algorithmic operator introduced by the authors; no independent physical or mathematical justification supplied beyond the performance claim.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5531 in / 1376 out tokens · 37099 ms · 2026-05-16T14:12:39.795849+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

dynamic quantum tunneling mechanism... WKB approximation... Pt(xi)=exp(−2√(2m)/ℏ ∫√(V(x)−Ek) dx)
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

good point set-chaos reverse learning... dynamic elite pool with Cauchy-Gaussian hybrid perturbations

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

[1]

Neural Computing and Applications36(25), 15407–15438 (2024)

Abbasi, B., Majidnezhad, V., Mirjalili, S.: Ade: advanced differential evolution. Neural Computing and Applications36(25), 15407–15438 (2024)

work page 2024
[2]

Applied Soft Computing89, 106092 (2020)

Agrawal, R., Kaur, B., Sharma, S.: Quantum based whale optimization algorithm for wrapper feature selection. Applied Soft Computing89, 106092 (2020)

work page 2020
[3]

IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation15(1), 4–31 (2010)

Das, S., Suganthan, P.N.: Differential evolution: A survey of the state-of-the-art. IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation15(1), 4–31 (2010)

work page 2010
[4]

In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference

Fujita, S., Ishizawa, R., Sato, H., Takadama, K.: Adaptive multi-population dy- namic optimization for multimodal dynamic function optimization. In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. pp. 1540–1548 (2025)

work page 2025
[5]

In: 2020 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC)

Gurrola-Ramos, J., Hernàndez-Aguirre, A., Dalmau-Cedeño, O.: Colshade for real- world single-objective constrained optimization problems. In: 2020 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC). pp. 1–8. IEEE (2020)

work page 2020
[6]

Sci- ence China Information Sciences64(5), 152204 (2021)

Khan, A.T., Cao, X., Li, S., Hu, B., Katsikis, V.N.: Quantum beetle antennae search: a novel technique for the constrained portfolio optimization problem. Sci- ence China Information Sciences64(5), 152204 (2021)

work page 2021
[7]

In: Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion

Kumar, A., Das, S., Zelinka, I.: A self-adaptive spherical search algorithm for real- world constrained optimization problems. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion. p. 13–14 (2020)

work page 2020
[8]

Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Zhengzhou University pp

Liang, J.J., Qu, B., Gong, D., Yue, C.: Problem definitions and evaluation cri- teria for the cec 2019 special session on multimodal multiobjective optimization. Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Zhengzhou University pp. 353–370 (2019)

work page 2019
[9]

Journal of Finance7(11), 77–91 (1952)

Markowitz, H.: Modern portfolio theory. Journal of Finance7(11), 77–91 (1952)

work page 1952
[10]

Insurance: Mathematics and Economics31(2), 249–265 (2002)

Menoncin, F.: Optimal portfolio and background risk: an exact and an approxi- mated solution. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics31(2), 249–265 (2002)

work page 2002
[11]

Mohamed,A.W.,Hadi,A.A.,Mohamed,A.K.,Agrawal,P.,Kumar,A.,Suganthan, P.: Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the cec 2021 special session and competition on single objective bound constrained numerical optimization. Tech. Rep. (2020)

work page 2021
[12]

In: International conference on parallel problem solving from nature

Ros, R., Hansen, N.: A simple modification in cma-es achieving linear time and space complexity. In: International conference on parallel problem solving from nature. pp. 296–305. Springer (2008)

work page 2008
[13]

Applied Soft Computing146, 110665 (2023)

Song, L., Dong, Y., Guo, Q., Meng, Y., Zhao, G.: An adaptive differential evolution algorithm with dbscan for the integrated slab allocation problem in steel industry. Applied Soft Computing146, 110665 (2023)

work page 2023
[14]

In: Proceedings of the 2004 congress on evolutionary computation (IEEE Cat

Sun, J., Feng, B., Xu, W.: Particle swarm optimization with particles having quan- tum behavior. In: Proceedings of the 2004 congress on evolutionary computation (IEEE Cat. No. 04TH8753). vol. 1, pp. 325–331. IEEE (2004)

work page 2004
[15]

Insurance: Mathematics and Economics42(2), 520–528 (2008)

Tsanakas, A.: Risk measurement in the presence of background risk. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics42(2), 520–528 (2008)

work page 2008
[16]

In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Compu- tation Conference

Wei, J., Zhang, Y., Wei, W.: Hsepso: A hierarchical self-evolutionary pso approach for uav path planning. In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Compu- tation Conference. pp. 1577–1584 (2025)

work page 2025
[17]

Applied Mathematical Modelling155, 116736 (2026)

Yang, H., Yu, M., Zhang, J., Xiong, Y., Wang, D., Xu, J.: A rein- forced quantum aquila optimizer for multi-threat 3d uavs path plan- ning in complex environments. Applied Mathematical Modelling155, 116736 (2026). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2025.116736, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0307904X25008091 16 M. Yu et al

work page doi:10.1016/j.apm.2025.116736 2026
[18]

Zenodo (2026), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19397557

Yu, M., Zhang, J.: Supporting material:qhde. Zenodo (2026), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19397557

work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.19397557 2026
[19]

Displays92, 103334 (2026)

Yu, M., Lu, H., Wang, D., Du, J., Kong, D., Xu, X., Xu, J.: Quantum-enhanced gold rush optimizer for multi-threshold segmen- tation of lupus nephritis pathological images. Displays92, 103334 (2026). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2025.103334, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141938225003713

work page doi:10.1016/j.displa.2025.103334 2026
[20]

Artificial Intelligence Review (2026)

Yu, M., Zhang, J., Yu, L., Yang, H., Lu, H., Wei, X., Xu, J.: Alzheimer’s disease brain image segmentation using multi-feature fusion in 3d rényi entropy model and quantum hybrid optimization. Artificial Intelligence Review (2026)

work page 2026
[21]

Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence163, 112587 (2026)

Zhang, S.X., Liu, Y.H., Hu, X.R., Luo, J.T., Zheng, L.M., Zheng, S.Y.: Differential evolution with dimensionally adaptive inheri- tance. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence163, 112587 (2026). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2025.112587, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952197625026181

work page doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2025.112587 2026
[22]

Applied Soft Computing171, 112777 (2025)

Zhong, R., Hussien, A.G., Zhang, S., Xu, Y., Yu, J.: Space mission trajectory optimization via competitive differential evolution with in- dependent success history adaptation. Applied Soft Computing171, 112777 (2025). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2025.112777, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1568494625000882

work page doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2025.112777 2025

[1] [1]

Neural Computing and Applications36(25), 15407–15438 (2024)

Abbasi, B., Majidnezhad, V., Mirjalili, S.: Ade: advanced differential evolution. Neural Computing and Applications36(25), 15407–15438 (2024)

work page 2024

[2] [2]

Applied Soft Computing89, 106092 (2020)

Agrawal, R., Kaur, B., Sharma, S.: Quantum based whale optimization algorithm for wrapper feature selection. Applied Soft Computing89, 106092 (2020)

work page 2020

[3] [3]

IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation15(1), 4–31 (2010)

Das, S., Suganthan, P.N.: Differential evolution: A survey of the state-of-the-art. IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation15(1), 4–31 (2010)

work page 2010

[4] [4]

In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference

Fujita, S., Ishizawa, R., Sato, H., Takadama, K.: Adaptive multi-population dy- namic optimization for multimodal dynamic function optimization. In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. pp. 1540–1548 (2025)

work page 2025

[5] [5]

In: 2020 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC)

Gurrola-Ramos, J., Hernàndez-Aguirre, A., Dalmau-Cedeño, O.: Colshade for real- world single-objective constrained optimization problems. In: 2020 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC). pp. 1–8. IEEE (2020)

work page 2020

[6] [6]

Sci- ence China Information Sciences64(5), 152204 (2021)

Khan, A.T., Cao, X., Li, S., Hu, B., Katsikis, V.N.: Quantum beetle antennae search: a novel technique for the constrained portfolio optimization problem. Sci- ence China Information Sciences64(5), 152204 (2021)

work page 2021

[7] [7]

In: Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion

Kumar, A., Das, S., Zelinka, I.: A self-adaptive spherical search algorithm for real- world constrained optimization problems. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion. p. 13–14 (2020)

work page 2020

[8] [8]

Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Zhengzhou University pp

Liang, J.J., Qu, B., Gong, D., Yue, C.: Problem definitions and evaluation cri- teria for the cec 2019 special session on multimodal multiobjective optimization. Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Zhengzhou University pp. 353–370 (2019)

work page 2019

[9] [9]

Journal of Finance7(11), 77–91 (1952)

Markowitz, H.: Modern portfolio theory. Journal of Finance7(11), 77–91 (1952)

work page 1952

[10] [10]

Insurance: Mathematics and Economics31(2), 249–265 (2002)

Menoncin, F.: Optimal portfolio and background risk: an exact and an approxi- mated solution. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics31(2), 249–265 (2002)

work page 2002

[11] [11]

Mohamed,A.W.,Hadi,A.A.,Mohamed,A.K.,Agrawal,P.,Kumar,A.,Suganthan, P.: Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the cec 2021 special session and competition on single objective bound constrained numerical optimization. Tech. Rep. (2020)

work page 2021

[12] [12]

In: International conference on parallel problem solving from nature

Ros, R., Hansen, N.: A simple modification in cma-es achieving linear time and space complexity. In: International conference on parallel problem solving from nature. pp. 296–305. Springer (2008)

work page 2008

[13] [13]

Applied Soft Computing146, 110665 (2023)

Song, L., Dong, Y., Guo, Q., Meng, Y., Zhao, G.: An adaptive differential evolution algorithm with dbscan for the integrated slab allocation problem in steel industry. Applied Soft Computing146, 110665 (2023)

work page 2023

[14] [14]

In: Proceedings of the 2004 congress on evolutionary computation (IEEE Cat

Sun, J., Feng, B., Xu, W.: Particle swarm optimization with particles having quan- tum behavior. In: Proceedings of the 2004 congress on evolutionary computation (IEEE Cat. No. 04TH8753). vol. 1, pp. 325–331. IEEE (2004)

work page 2004

[15] [15]

Insurance: Mathematics and Economics42(2), 520–528 (2008)

Tsanakas, A.: Risk measurement in the presence of background risk. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics42(2), 520–528 (2008)

work page 2008

[16] [16]

In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Compu- tation Conference

Wei, J., Zhang, Y., Wei, W.: Hsepso: A hierarchical self-evolutionary pso approach for uav path planning. In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Compu- tation Conference. pp. 1577–1584 (2025)

work page 2025

[17] [17]

Applied Mathematical Modelling155, 116736 (2026)

Yang, H., Yu, M., Zhang, J., Xiong, Y., Wang, D., Xu, J.: A rein- forced quantum aquila optimizer for multi-threat 3d uavs path plan- ning in complex environments. Applied Mathematical Modelling155, 116736 (2026). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2025.116736, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0307904X25008091 16 M. Yu et al

work page doi:10.1016/j.apm.2025.116736 2026

[18] [18]

Zenodo (2026), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19397557

Yu, M., Zhang, J.: Supporting material:qhde. Zenodo (2026), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19397557

work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.19397557 2026

[19] [19]

Displays92, 103334 (2026)

Yu, M., Lu, H., Wang, D., Du, J., Kong, D., Xu, X., Xu, J.: Quantum-enhanced gold rush optimizer for multi-threshold segmen- tation of lupus nephritis pathological images. Displays92, 103334 (2026). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2025.103334, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141938225003713

work page doi:10.1016/j.displa.2025.103334 2026

[20] [20]

Artificial Intelligence Review (2026)

Yu, M., Zhang, J., Yu, L., Yang, H., Lu, H., Wei, X., Xu, J.: Alzheimer’s disease brain image segmentation using multi-feature fusion in 3d rényi entropy model and quantum hybrid optimization. Artificial Intelligence Review (2026)

work page 2026

[21] [21]

Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence163, 112587 (2026)

Zhang, S.X., Liu, Y.H., Hu, X.R., Luo, J.T., Zheng, L.M., Zheng, S.Y.: Differential evolution with dimensionally adaptive inheri- tance. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence163, 112587 (2026). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2025.112587, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952197625026181

work page doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2025.112587 2026

[22] [22]

Applied Soft Computing171, 112777 (2025)

Zhong, R., Hussien, A.G., Zhang, S., Xu, Y., Yu, J.: Space mission trajectory optimization via competitive differential evolution with in- dependent success history adaptation. Applied Soft Computing171, 112777 (2025). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2025.112777, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1568494625000882

work page doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2025.112777 2025