Constraint-Handling Method for Function Optimization : Pareto Descent Repair Operator

Function optimization underlies many real-world problems and hence is an important research subject. Most of the existing optimization methods were developed to solve primarily unconstrained problems. Since real-world problems are often constrained, appropriate handling of constraints is necessary in order to use the optimization methods. In particular, the performances of some methods such as Genetic Algorithms (GA) can be substantially undermined by ineffective constraint handling. Despite much effort devoted to the studies of constraint-handling methods, it has been reported that each of them has certain limitations. Hence, further studies for designing more effective constraint-handling methods are needed. For this reason, we investigated the guidelines for a method to effectively handle constraints. The guidelines are that the method 1) takes the approach of repair operators, 2) monotonically decreases both the number of violated constraints and constraint violations, and 3) searches over the boundaries of violated constraints. Based on these guidelines, we designed a new constraint-handling method Pareto Descent Repair operator (PDR) in which ideas derived from multi-objective local search and gradient projection method are incorporated. Experiments comparing GA that use PDR and some of the existing constraint-handling methods confirmed the effectiveness of PDR.

[1]  Shigenobu Kobayashi,et al.  Hybridization of genetic algorithm and local search in multiobjective function optimization: recommendation of GA then LS , 2006, GECCO '06.

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

[3]  淳 佐久間,et al.  多目的関数最適化におけるGAと局所探索の組み合わせ: GA then LSの推奨 , 2006 .

[4]  K. Deb An Efficient Constraint Handling Method for Genetic Algorithms , 2000 .

[5]  David G. Luenberger,et al.  Linear and nonlinear programming , 1984 .

[6]  Joshua D. Knowles,et al.  Memetic Algorithms for Multiobjective Optimization: Issues, Methods and Prospects , 2004 .

[7]  Joshua D. Knowles,et al.  On metrics for comparing nondominated sets , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC'02 (Cat. No.02TH8600).

[8]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms , 2001, Wiley-Interscience series in systems and optimization.

[9]  Jörg Fliege,et al.  Steepest descent methods for multicriteria optimization , 2000, Math. Methods Oper. Res..

[10]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  THEORETICAL AND NUMERICAL CONSTRAINT-HANDLING TECHNIQUES USED WITH EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHMS: A SURVEY OF THE STATE OF THE ART , 2002 .

[11]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  Scalable multi-objective optimization test problems , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC'02 (Cat. No.02TH8600).

[12]  Isao Ono,et al.  Local Search for Multiobjective Function Optimization: Pareto Descent Method , 2006 .

[13]  A. Oyama,et al.  Evolutionary and Deterministic Methods for Design, Optimization and Control with Applications to Industrial and Societal Problems Eurogen 2005 New Constraint-handling Method for Multi-objective Multi-constraint Evolutionary Optimization and Its Application to Space Plane Design , 2022 .

[14]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  SPEA2: Improving the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm For Multiobjective Optimization , 2002 .