Pareto Dominance-Based Algorithms With Ranking Methods for Many-Objective Optimization

In Pareto dominance-based multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (PDMOEAs), Pareto dominance fails to provide the essential selection pressure required to drive the search toward convergence in many-objective optimization problems (MaOPs). Recently, the idea of using secondary criterion, such as knee points and so on to enhance the convergence, is becoming popular. In this paper, we propose to employ popular ranking methods—average rank (AR) and weighted sum (WS) of objectives, which are capable of accelerating the convergence as secondary criterion. After nondominated sorting, based on the secondary criterion employed (AR or WS) and a niche radius, nondominated solutions are assigned a rank referred to as priority rank (PR). In other words, among a set of nondominated solutions, solutions that are diverse and best within a neighborhood in terms of ranking method (AR or WS) employed are assigned a better PR. During mating and environmental selections, giving preference to solutions with least PR enables the selection of solutions that are diverse and can improve the convergence speed of MOEA without the need for additional diversity maintenance mechanisms. The performances of proposed PDMOEAs with ranking methods are compared with the state-of-the-art methods to demonstrate the significance of ranking methods in accelerating the convergence. PDMOEA with AR as secondary criterion is referred to as PDMOEA-AR while PDMOEA with WS as secondary criterion is referred to as PDMOEA-WS. From the experimental results, it has been observed that PDMOEAs with ranking methods (PDMOEA-AR and PDMOEA-WS) outperform the state-of-the-art algorithms on benchmark MaOPs, such as DTLZ and WFG. In addition, it has been observed that PDMOEA-AR performs better on a wide variety of MaOPs with diverse characteristics whereas PDMOEA-WS is particularly suitable for only a subclass of MaOPs. In other words, the range-independent nature of AR makes PDMOEA-AR a general-purpose algorithm, which performs better on a wide variety of problems.

[1]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  Combining Convergence and Diversity in Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization , 2002, Evolutionary Computation.

[2]  Peter J. Bentley,et al.  Finding Acceptable Solutions in the Pareto-Optimal Range using Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms , 1998 .

[3]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach , 1999, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[4]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  Scalable Test Problems for Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization , 2005, Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization.

[5]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Using Reference-Point-Based Nondominated Sorting Approach, Part I: Solving Problems With Box Constraints , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[6]  Ye Tian,et al.  An Efficient Approach to Nondominated Sorting for Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  R. K. Ursem.  Multi-objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms , 2009 .

[8]  Qingfu Zhang,et al.  MOEA/D: A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Decomposition , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[9]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A combined genetic adaptive search (GeneAS) for engineering design , 1996 .

[10]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[11]  R. Lyndon While,et al.  A faster algorithm for calculating hypervolume , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[12]  Nicola Beume,et al.  SMS-EMOA: Multiobjective selection based on dominated hypervolume , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  Lishan Kang,et al.  A New Evolutionary Algorithm for Solving Many-Objective Optimization Problems , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics).

[14]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Simulated Binary Crossover for Continuous Search Space , 1995, Complex Syst..

[15]  Soon-Thiam Khu,et al.  An Investigation on Preference Order Ranking Scheme for Multiobjective Evolutionary Optimization , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[16]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  Ranking Methods for Many-Objective Optimization , 2009, MICAI.

[17]  Shengxiang Yang,et al.  Bi-goal evolution for many-objective optimization problems , 2015, Artif. Intell..

[18]  Ye Tian,et al.  A Knee Point-Driven Evolutionary Algorithm for Many-Objective Optimization , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[19]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  SPEA2: Improving the strength pareto evolutionary algorithm , 2001 .

[20]  Eckart Zitzler,et al.  HypE: An Algorithm for Fast Hypervolume-Based Many-Objective Optimization , 2011, Evolutionary Computation.

[21]  Patrick M. Reed,et al.  Borg: An Auto-Adaptive Many-Objective Evolutionary Computing Framework , 2013, Evolutionary Computation.

[22]  Gaoping Wang,et al.  Fuzzy-Dominance and Its Application in Evolutionary Many Objective Optimization , 2007, 2007 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Security Workshops (CISW 2007).

[23]  Joshua D. Knowles,et al.  M-PAES: a memetic algorithm for multiobjective optimization , 2000, Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC00 (Cat. No.00TH8512).

[24]  Shengxiang Yang,et al.  A Grid-Based Evolutionary Algorithm for Many-Objective Optimization , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[25]  Tobias Friedrich,et al.  Approximation quality of the hypervolume indicator , 2013, Artif. Intell..

[26]  Eckart Zitzler,et al.  Indicator-Based Selection in Multiobjective Search , 2004, PPSN.

[27]  Martin J. Oates,et al.  PESA-II: region-based selection in evolutionary multiobjective optimization , 2001 .

[28]  R. Lyndon While,et al.  A review of multiobjective test problems and a scalable test problem toolkit , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.