E-NAUTILUS: A decision support system for complex multiobjective optimization problems based on the NAUTILUS method

Interactive multiobjective optimization methods cannot necessarily be easily used when (industrial) multiobjective optimization problems are involved. There are at least two important factors to be considered with any interactive method: computationally expensive functions and aspects of human behavior. In this paper, we propose a method based on the existing NAUTILUS method and call it the Enhanced NAUTILUS (E-NAUTILUS) method. This method borrows the motivation of NAUTILUS along with the human aspects related to avoiding trading-off and anchoring bias and extends its applicability for computationally expensive multiobjective optimization problems. In the E-NAUTILUS method, a set of Pareto optimal solutions is calculated in a pre-processing stage before the decision maker is involved. When the decision maker interacts with the solution process in the interactive decision making stage, no new optimization problem is solved, thus, avoiding the waiting time for the decision maker to obtain new solutions according to her/his preferences. In this stage, starting from the worst possible objective function values, the decision maker is shown a set of points in the objective space, from which (s)he chooses one as the preferable point. At successive iterations, (s)he always sees points which improve all the objective values achieved by the previously chosen point. In this way, the decision maker remains focused on the solution process, as there is no loss in any objective function value between successive iterations. The last post-processing stage ensures the Pareto optimality of the final solution. A real-life engineering problem is used to demonstrate how E-NAUTILUS works in practice.

[1]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Nadir Point Estimation Using Evolutionary Approaches: Better Accuracy and Computational Speed Through Focused Search , 2010, MCDM.

[2]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[3]  Andrzej P. Wierzbicki,et al.  The Use of Reference Objectives in Multiobjective Optimization , 1979 .

[4]  R. Benayoun,et al.  Linear programming with multiple objective functions: Step method (stem) , 1971, Math. Program..

[5]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Toward an Estimation of Nadir Objective Vector Using a Hybrid of Evolutionary and Local Search Approaches , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[6]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[7]  Pekka Korhonen,et al.  Behavioral Issues in MCDM: Neglected Research Questions , 1996 .

[8]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk — Source link , 2007 .

[9]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A review of hybrid evolutionary multiple criteria decision making methods , 2014, 2014 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[10]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Global formulation for interactive multiobjective optimization , 2011, OR Spectr..

[11]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Introduction to Multiobjective Optimization: Noninteractive Approaches , 2008, Multiobjective Optimization.

[12]  John E. Dennis,et al.  Normal-Boundary Intersection: A New Method for Generating the Pareto Surface in Nonlinear Multicriteria Optimization Problems , 1998, SIAM J. Optim..

[13]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Improving the computational efficiency in a global formulation (GLIDE) for interactive multiobjective optimization , 2011, Annals of Operations Research.

[14]  Carlos Platero,et al.  Multicriteria optimization of the investment in the auxiliary services of thermal power plants: A case study , 2015 .

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

[16]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  NAUTILUS method: An interactive technique in multiobjective optimization based on the nadir point , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

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

[18]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  A solution process for simulation-based multiobjective design optimization with an application in the paper industry , 2014, Comput. Aided Des..

[19]  I. Janis,et al.  Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice, and Commitment , 1977 .

[20]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A Hybrid Framework for Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

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

[22]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  PAINT: Pareto front interpolation for nonlinear multiobjective optimization , 2012, Comput. Optim. Appl..

[23]  Joel N. Morse,et al.  Reducing the size of the nondominated set: Pruning by clustering , 1980, Comput. Oper. Res..

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

[25]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Introduction to Multiobjective Optimization: Interactive Approaches , 2008, Multiobjective Optimization.

[26]  K. Miettinen,et al.  Incorporating preference information in interactive reference point methods for multiobjective optimization , 2009 .

[27]  Kathrin Klamroth,et al.  Integrating Approximation and Interactive Decision Making in Multicriteria Optimization , 2008, Oper. Res..

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