Helper-Objectives: Using Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms for Single-Objective Optimisation

This paper investigates the use of multi-objective methods to guide the search when solving single-objective optimisation problems with genetic algorithms. Using the job shop scheduling and travelling salesman problems as examples, experiments demonstrate that the use of helper-objectives (additional objectives guiding the search) significantly improves the average performance of a standard GA. The helper-objectives guide the search towards solutions containing good building blocks and help the algorithm escape local optima. The experiments reveal that the approach works if the number of simultaneously used helper-objectives is low. However, a high number of helper-objectives can be used in the same run by changing the helper-objectives dynamically. The experiments reveal that for the majority of problem instances studied, the proposed approach significantly outperforms a traditional GA.The experiments also demonstrate that controlling the proportion of non-dominated solutions in the population is very important when using helper-objectives, since the presence of too many non-dominated solutions removes the selection pressure in the algorithm.

[1]  G. Thompson,et al.  Algorithms for Solving Production-Scheduling Problems , 1960 .

[2]  H. T. Kung,et al.  On the Average Number of Maxima in a Set of Vectors and Applications , 1978, JACM.

[3]  L. Darrell Whitley,et al.  A Comparison of Genetic Sequencing Operators , 1991, ICGA.

[4]  R. Storer,et al.  New search spaces for sequencing problems with application to job shop scheduling , 1992 .

[5]  Jon Jouis Bentley,et al.  Fast Algorithms for Geometric Traveling Salesman Problems , 1992, INFORMS J. Comput..

[6]  Sushil J. Louis,et al.  Pareto OptimalityGA-Easiness and Deception (Extended Abstract) , 1993, International Conference on Genetic Algorithms.

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

[8]  Mikkel T. Jensen,et al.  Robust and Flexible Scheduling with Evolutionary Computation , 2001 .

[9]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Multiobjective genetic programming: reducing bloat using SPEA2 , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE Cat. No.01TH8546).

[10]  Mike Wright,et al.  Subcost-Guided Search—Experiments with Timetabling Problems , 2001, J. Heuristics.

[11]  Richard A. Watson,et al.  Reducing Local Optima in Single-Objective Problems by Multi-objectivization , 2001, EMO.

[12]  H. Abbass,et al.  PDE: a Pareto-frontier differential evolution approach for multi-objective optimization problems , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE Cat. No.01TH8546).

[13]  Edwin D. de Jong,et al.  Reducing bloat and promoting diversity using multi-objective methods , 2001 .

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

[15]  A. H. Aguirre,et al.  Design of combinational logic circuits through an evolutionary multiobjective optimization approach , 2002, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

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

[17]  Ingo Wegener,et al.  Fitness Landscapes Based on Sorting and Shortest Paths Problems , 2002, PPSN.

[18]  Mikkel T. Jensen,et al.  Guiding Single-Objective Optimization Using Multi-objective Methods , 2003, EvoWorkshops.

[19]  Mikkel T. Jensen,et al.  Reducing the run-time complexity of multiobjective EAs: The NSGA-II and other algorithms , 2003, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[20]  Anikó Ekárt,et al.  Selection Based on the Pareto Nondomination Criterion for Controlling Code Growth in Genetic Programming , 2001, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.