Multiobjective controller design handling human preferences

Trends in controller design point to the integration of several objectives to achieve new performances. Moreover, it is easy to set the controller design problem as an optimization problem. Therefore, future improvements are likely to be based on the adequate formulation and resolution of the multiobjective optimization problem. The multiobjective optimization strategy called physical programming provides controller designers with a flexible tool to express design preferences with a 'physical' meaning. For each objective (settling time, overshoot, disturbance rejection, etc.) preferences are established through categories such as desirable, tolerable, unacceptable, etc. to which numerical values are assigned. The problem is normalized and converted to a single-objective optimization problem but normally it results in a multimodal problem very difficult to solve. Genetic algorithms provide an adequate solution to this type of problems and open new possibilities in controller design and tuning.

[1]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Genetic algorithms + data structures = evolution programs (3rd ed.) , 1996 .

[2]  Oded Yaniv,et al.  Benchmark problem solution by quantitative feedback theory , 1992 .

[3]  Gary B. Lamont,et al.  Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems , 2002, Genetic Algorithms and Evolutionary Computation.

[4]  James E. Baker,et al.  Reducing Bias and Inefficienry in the Selection Algorithm , 1987, ICGA.

[5]  Dennis S. Bernstein,et al.  A Benchmark Problem for Robust Control Design , 1990, 1990 American Control Conference.

[6]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs , 1996, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[7]  Peter J. Fleming,et al.  Evolutionary algorithms in control systems engineering: a survey , 2002 .

[8]  Dennis S. Bernstein,et al.  Benchmark Problems for Robust Control Design , 1991, 1991 American Control Conference.

[9]  Robert F. Stengel,et al.  Robustness of solutions to a benchmark control problem , 1992 .

[10]  Thomas Bäck,et al.  Evolutionary Algorithms in Theory and Practice , 1996 .

[11]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Nonlinear multiobjective optimization , 1998, International series in operations research and management science.

[12]  Dennis S. Bernstein,et al.  Benchmark Problems for Robust Control Design (1992 ACC Version) , 1992, 1992 American Control Conference.

[13]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[14]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Genetic Algorithms in Search Optimization and Machine Learning , 1988 .

[15]  Bruce H. Wilson,et al.  Physical Programming for Computational Control , 1998 .

[16]  Heinz Mühlenbein,et al.  Predictive Models for the Breeder Genetic Algorithm I. Continuous Parameter Optimization , 1993, Evolutionary Computation.

[17]  Achille Messac,et al.  Physical programming - Effective optimization for computational design , 1996 .