Search biases in constrained evolutionary optimization

A common approach to constraint handling in evolutionary optimization is to apply a penalty function to bias the search toward a feasible solution. It has been proposed that the subjective setting of various penalty parameters can be avoided using a multiobjective formulation. This paper analyzes and explains in depth why and when the multiobjective approach to constraint handling is expected to work or fail. Furthermore, an improved evolutionary algorithm based on evolution strategies and differential variation is proposed. Extensive experimental studies have been carried out. Our results reveal that the unbiased multiobjective approach to constraint handling may not be as effective as one may have assumed.

[1]  John A. Nelder,et al.  A Simplex Method for Function Minimization , 1965, Comput. J..

[2]  H. T. Kung,et al.  On Finding the Maxima of a Set of Vectors , 1975, JACM.

[3]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  A Derandomized Approach to Self-Adaptation of Evolution Strategies , 1994, Evolutionary Computation.

[4]  Hans-Paul Schwefel,et al.  Evolution and optimum seeking , 1995, Sixth-generation computer technology series.

[5]  Patrick D. Surry,et al.  A Multi-objective Approach to Constrained Optimisation of Gas Supply Networks: the COMOGA Method , 1995, Evolutionary Computing, AISB Workshop.

[6]  Ralf Salomon,et al.  Some Comments on Evolutionary Algorithm Theory , 1996, Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  David H. Wolpert,et al.  No free lunch theorems for optimization , 1997, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[8]  Rainer Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces , 1997, J. Glob. Optim..

[9]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Evolutionary Algorithms, Homomorphous Mappings, and Constrained Parameter Optimization , 1999, Evolutionary Computation.

[10]  Xin Yao,et al.  Evolutionary programming made faster , 1999, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[11]  H. Beyer.  Evolutionary algorithms in noisy environments : theoretical issues and guidelines for practice , 2000 .

[12]  Xin Yao,et al.  Stochastic ranking for constrained evolutionary optimization , 2000, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[13]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Test-case generator for nonlinear continuous parameter optimization techniques , 2000, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[14]  Tapabrata Ray,et al.  An Evolutionary Algorithm for Constrained Optimization , 2000, GECCO.

[15]  C. Coello.  TREATING CONSTRAINTS AS OBJECTIVES FOR SINGLE-OBJECTIVE EVOLUTIONARY OPTIMIZATION , 2000 .

[16]  Hans-Georg Beyer,et al.  The Theory of Evolution Strategies , 2001, Natural Computing Series.

[17]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  Completely Derandomized Self-Adaptation in Evolution Strategies , 2001, Evolutionary Computation.

[18]  Thomas Philip Runarsson,et al.  Reducing Random Fluctuations in Mutative Self-adaptation , 2002, PPSN.

[19]  X. Yao,et al.  Constrained Evolutionary Optimization - the penalty function approach , 2002 .

[20]  Carlos Artemio Coello-Coello,et al.  Theoretical and numerical constraint-handling techniques used with evolutionary algorithms: a survey of the state of the art , 2002 .

[21]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  IS-PAES: A Constraint-Handling Technique Based on Multiobjective Optimization Concepts , 2003, EMO.