Stochastic Residual Selection in Simulated Annealing for Clusterwise Panel Optimization

Authors

  • Luh Putu Widya Adnyani IPB University
  • Bagus Sartono IPB University
  • Asep Saefuddin IPB University
  • I Made Sumertajaya IPB University
  • Gerry Alfa Dito IPB University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29207/resti.v10i4.7608

Keywords:

clusterwise regression, metaheuristic optimization, simulated annealing, stochastic optimization, unobserved heterogeneity

Abstract

Modeling heterogeneity in panel data requires solving a complex combinatorial partition problem under structural constraints. Although clusterwise regression captures latent group structures with distinct parameters, determining the optimal partition remains computationally challenging due to the vast solution space and susceptibility to local minima. This study proposes a modified simulated annealing (SA) algorithm incorporating a Stochastic Residual Selection (SRS) mechanism, in which candidate units are selected from a high-residual subset rather than deterministically relocating only the unit with the largest residual. The stochastic candidate-size parameter was evaluated using m=1 and m=5, where m=1 represents deterministic selection of the largest residual unit, while m=5 randomly selects one unit from the five largest-residual units for clusterreassignment. The stochastic perturbation enhances global exploration and improves convergence stability in non-convex optimization landscape. Simulation experiments involving 200 individuals observed over three time periods demonstrate that the proposed SRS-SA outperforms standard SA, achieving an Adjusted Rand Index of approximately 0.95 at 1,000 iterations while producing lower Mean Absolute Bias and Mean Squared Error. An empirical application to improved sanitation data across districts and municipalities in Java, Indonesia, further confirms its effectiveness in identifying latent structural heterogeneity. These findings highlight the robustness and computational efficiency gained through stochastic diversification in metaheuristic optimization for constrained clusterwise panel modeling.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

T. Eibinger, B. Deixelberger, and H. Manner, “Panel data in environmental economics: Econometric issues and applications to IPAT models,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol. 125, no. 102941, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2024.102941.

A. Carlson and R. Joshu, “Sample selection in linear panel data models with heterogeneous coefficients,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 237–255, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.3022.

P. R. Sihombing, Erfiani, K. A. Notodiputro, and A. Kurnia, “Comparative performance of GLMM and GEE for longitudinal beta regression in economic inequality modelling,” Advance Sustainable Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1–8, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.26877/asset.v7i3.2057.

H. T. Thi and P. T. Thi, “Analyzing determinants of CO2 emissions in ASEAN : Evidence from panel regression and threshold model,” International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1044–1056, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.53894/ijirss.v8i4.7990.

J. A. Loyo and T. Boot, “Grouped heterogeneity in linear panel data models with heterogeneous error variances,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 68–80, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.2024.2325440.

M. H. Pesaran and L. Yang, “Heterogeneous autoregressions in short T panel data models,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 1359–1378, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.3085.

T. Ruttenauer and V. Ludwig, “Fixed effects individual slopes : accounting and testing for heterogeneous effects in panel data or other multilevel models,” Sociological Methods & Research, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 43–84, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124120926211.

A. Mehrabani, “Estimation and identification of latent group structures in panel data,” Journal of Econometrics, vol. 235, no. 2, pp. 1464–1482, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2022.12.002.

G. Perrone and G. Soffritti, “Seemingly unrelated clusterwise linear regression for contaminated data,” Statistical Papers, vol. 64, pp. 883–921, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-022-01344-6.

Y. Wang, P. C. B. Phillips, and L. Su, “Panel Data Models with Time-Varying Latent Group Structures,” Journal of Econometrics, vol. 240, no. 1, pp. 1–41, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2024.105685.

Xi. Yang, J. Chen, D. Li, and R. Li, “Functional-coefficient quantile regression for panel data with latent group structure,” J Bus Econ Stat, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 1026–1040, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.2023.2277172.

L. A. Gracia-Escudero and A. Mayo-Iscar, “Robust clustering based on trimming,” Computational Statistics, vol. 16, pp. 1–17, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.1658.

A. Bolufé-röhler and D. Tamayo-vera, “Machine learning for enhancing metaheuristics in global optimization : a comprehensive review,” Mathematics, vol. 13, no. 2909, pp. 1–37, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/math13182909.

Y. H. Irawan, P. T. Lin, B. Street, K. Rd, and T. City, “Parametric optimization technique for continuous and combinational problems based on simulated annealing algorithm,” Journal of Energy, Mechanical, Material, and Manufacturing Engineering, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 75–82, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.22219/jemmme.v8i2.29556.

M. K. Hajji, O. Hamlaoui, and H. Hadda, “A simulated annealing metaheuristic approach to hybrid flow shop scheduling problem,” Advances in Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, vol. 9, no. 100144, pp. 1–11, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aime.2024.100144.

A. Chembu, S. Sanner, and E. B. Khalil, “Scalable and near-optimal ε -tube clusterwise regression,” in International Conference on Integration of Constraint Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Operations Research, 2023, pp. 254–263. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33271-5_17.

I. C. Joao, J. Schaumburg, A. Lucas, and B. Schwaab, “Dynamic nonparametric clustering of multivariate panel data,” Journal of Financial Econometrics, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 335–374, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2022.03.003.

P. Ghannadi, S. S. Kourehli, and S. Mirjalili, “A review of the application of the simulated annealing algorithm in structural health monitoring (1995-2021),” Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, vol. 64, pp. 51–76, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.3221/IGF-ESIS.64.04.

B. N. Palaparthi and S. Akthar, “Unsupervised machine learning models for focused target customer segmentation,” Journal of Information System Engineering and Management, vol. 10, no. 38s, pp. 1108–1124, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.52783/jisem.v10i38s.7072.

M. J. Warrens and H. van der Hoef, “Understanding the adjusted rand index and other partition comparison indices based on counting object pairs,” Journal of Classification, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 487–509, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00357-022-09413-z.

M. Gagolewski, “Normalised clustering accuracy : an asymmetric external cluster validity measure,” Journal of Classification, vol. 42, pp. 2–30, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00357-024-09482-2.

B. Schwendinger, L. Vana-gür, and F. Schwendinger, “Automated subset selection via information criteria optimization in generalized linear models,” Computational Statistics, vol. 40, pp. 5791–5831, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00180-025-01672-9.

A. K. Pathak, M. Arshad, A. K. Pandey, and A. Ali, “Record-based transmuted unit-omega distribution : different method of estimation and applications,” REVSTAT-Statistical Journal, vol. 0, no. 0, pp. 1–27, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.07958.

H. Ranglani, “Empirical analysis of the bias-variance tradeoff across machine learning models,” Machine Learning and Applications: An International Journal, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1–12, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.5121/mlaij.2024.11401.

M. Łukawska, L. Cazor, M. Paulsen, T. K. Rasmussen, and O. A. Nielsen, “Revealing and reducing bias when modelling choice behaviour on imbalanced panel datasets,” Journal of Choice Modelling, vol. 50, pp. 1–21, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2024.100471.

Z. Ucar and B. Cicek, “Estimation of daily energy requirements using a hybrid artificial intelligence model,” Scientific reports, vol. 15, no. 38882, pp. 1–19, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-22786-6.

Y. Wang, P. C. B. Phillips, and L. Su, “Panel data models with time-varying latent group structures,” Journal of Econometrics, vol. 2024, no. 240, p. 105685, 1864, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2024.105685.

M. B. Schenone, E. Grimaccia, and M. Vichi, “A novel clustering method with maximum number of ordered centroids and stable clusters for optimal ranking in a univariate setting,” Statistical Methods & Applications, vol. 34, pp. 607–637, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10260-025-00803-2.

Downloads

Published

2026-08-10

Issue

Section

Computer Science Applications

How to Cite

Luh Putu Widya Adnyani, Sartono, B. ., Saefuddin, A. ., Sumertajaya, I. M. ., & Dito, G. A. . (2026). Stochastic Residual Selection in Simulated Annealing for Clusterwise Panel Optimization. Jurnal RESTI (Rekayasa Sistem Dan Teknologi Informasi), 10(4), 1034-1044. https://doi.org/10.29207/resti.v10i4.7608