Niching by multiobjectivization with neighbor information: Trade-offs and benefits

In this paper we investigate the ability of selection methods to enforce niching on multi modal problems. Using theoretical properties where possible, and relying on a sound experimental analysis, we show that the conventional single-objective optimization and novelty search are extreme cases of selection, striving only for quality or diversity. However, in between these well known cases, there are many more possibilities, of which we review eight (including the aforementioned two). Multiobjective selection approaches provide a well-balanced trade-off' between exploration and exploitation. For the multiobjectivization, we recommend to use nearest-better-neighbor information instead of the common nearest-neighbor approaches.

[1]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Improved Pruning of Non-Dominated Solutions Based on Crowding Distance for Bi-Objective Optimization Problems , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation.

[2]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Defining and Optimizing Indicator-Based Diversity Measures in Multiobjective Search , 2010, PPSN.

[3]  Mike Preuss,et al.  Counteracting genetic drift and disruptive recombination in (μpluskommaλ)-EA on multimodal fitness landscapes , 2005, GECCO '05.

[4]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Abandoning Objectives: Evolution Through the Search for Novelty Alone , 2011, Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  Solving Multiobjective Optimization Problems Using an Artificial Immune System , 2005, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[6]  Alain Pétrowski,et al.  A clearing procedure as a niching method for genetic algorithms , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  Jing J. Liang,et al.  Differential Evolution With Neighborhood Mutation for Multimodal Optimization , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[8]  A. Solow,et al.  Measuring biological diversity , 2006, Environmental and Ecological Statistics.

[9]  Annie S. Wu,et al.  Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGEVO workshop on Foundations of genetic algorithms , 2009, FOGA 2009.

[10]  Samir W. Mahfoud.  Niching methods for genetic algorithms , 1996 .

[11]  R. K. Ursem.  Multinational evolutionary algorithms , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406).

[12]  Mike Preuss,et al.  Measuring Multimodal Optimization Solution Sets with a View to Multiobjective Techniques , 2013 .

[13]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Quality Assessment of Pareto Set Approximations , 2008, Multiobjective Optimization.

[14]  K. Dejong,et al.  An analysis of the behavior of a class of genetic adaptive systems , 1975 .

[15]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A Bi-criterion Approach to Multimodal Optimization: Self-adaptive Approach , 2010, SEAL.

[16]  P. John Clarkson,et al.  A Species Conserving Genetic Algorithm for Multimodal Function Optimization , 2002, Evolutionary Computation.

[17]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Multimodal Optimization Using a Bi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm , 2012, Evolutionary Computation.

[18]  Mike Preuss,et al.  On the Importance of Information Speed in Structured Populations , 2004, PPSN.

[19]  Tobias Friedrich,et al.  Don't be greedy when calculating hypervolume contributions , 2009, FOGA '09.

[20]  M. Preuss,et al.  Counteracting genetic drift and disruptive recombination in (μpluskommaλ)-EA on multimodal fitness landscapes , 2005, GECCO '05.

[21]  Dumitru Dumitrescu,et al.  Multimodal Optimization by Means of a Topological Species Conservation Algorithm , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[22]  Ofer M. Shir,et al.  Niching in evolution strategies , 2005, GECCO '05.

[23]  Jean-Baptiste Mouret.  Novelty-Based Multiobjectivization , 2011 .

[24]  Michael G. Epitropakis,et al.  Finding multiple global optima exploiting differential evolution's niching capability , 2011, 2011 IEEE Symposium on Differential Evolution (SDE).