The Value of Online Adaptive Search: A Performance Comparison of NSGAII, epsilon-NSGAII and epsilonMOEA

This paper demonstrates how adaptive population-sizing and epsilon-dominance archiving can be combined with the Nondominated Sorted Genetic Algorithm-II (NSGAII) to enhance the algorithm's efficiency, reliability, and ease-of-use. Four versions of the enhanced Epsilon Dominance NSGA-II (e-NSGAII) are tested on a standard suite of evolutionary multiobjective optimization test problems. Comparative results for the four variants of the (e-NSGAII demonstrate that adapting population size based on online changes in the epsilon dominance archive size can enhance performance. The best performing version of the (e-NSGAII is also compared to the original NSGAII and the (eMOEA on the same suite of test problems. The performance of each algorithm is measured using three running performance metrics, two of which have been previously published, and one new metric proposed by the authors. Results of the study indicate that the new version of the NSGAII proposed in this paper demonstrates improved performance on the majority of two-objective test problems studied.

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

[2]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Multi-objective Genetic Algorithms: Problem Difficulties and Construction of Test Problems , 1999, Evolutionary Computation.

[3]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  The Design of Innovation: Lessons from and for Competent Genetic Algorithms , 2002 .

[4]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Running performance metrics for evolutionary multi-objective optimizations , 2002 .

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

[6]  E. Cantu-Paz,et al.  The Gambler's Ruin Problem, Genetic Algorithms, and the Sizing of Populations , 1997, Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  Gary B. Lamont,et al.  Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Analyzing the State-of-the-Art , 2000, Evolutionary Computation.

[8]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Towards a Quick Computation of Well-Spread Pareto-Optimal Solutions , 2003, EMO.

[9]  Gary B. Lamont,et al.  Applications Of Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms , 2004 .

[10]  Patrick M. Reed,et al.  GROUNDWATER MONITORING DESIGN: A CASE STUDY COMBINING EPSILON DOMINANCE ARCHIVING AND AUTOMATIC PARAMETERIZATION FOR THE NSGA-II , 2004 .

[11]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Simplifying multiobjective optimization: An automated design methodology for the nondominated sorted genetic algorithm‐II , 2003 .

[12]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Comparison of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Empirical Results , 2000, Evolutionary Computation.

[13]  Patrick M. Reed,et al.  Using interactive archives in evolutionary multiobjective optimization: A case study for long-term groundwater monitoring design , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[14]  ReedPatrick,et al.  Using interactive archives in evolutionary multiobjective optimization , 2007 .