The maximum hypervolume set yields near-optimal approximation

In order to allow a comparison of (otherwise incomparable) sets, many evolutionary multiobjective optimizers use indicator functions to guide the search and to evaluate the performance of search algorithms. The most widely used indicator is the hypervolume indicator. It measures the volume of the dominated portion of the objective space. Though the hypervolume indicator is very popular, it has not been shown that maximizing the hypervolume indicator is indeed equivalent to the overall objective of finding a good approximation of the Pareto front. To address this question, we compare the optimal approximation factor with the approximation factor achieved by sets maximizing the hypervolume indicator. We bound the optimal approximation factor of n points by 1+Θ(1/n) for arbitrary Pareto fronts. Furthermore, we prove that the same asymptotic approximation ratio is achieved by sets of n points that maximize the hypervolume indicator. This shows that the speed of convergence of the approximation ratio achieved by maximizing the hypervolume indicator is asymptotically optimal. This implies that for large values of n, sets maximizing the hypervolume indicator quickly approach the optimal approximation ratio. Moreover, our bounds show that also for relatively small values of n, sets maximizing the hypervolume indicator achieve a near-optimal approximation ratio.

[1]  Mihalis Yannakakis,et al.  Multiobjective query optimization , 2001, PODS '01.

[2]  Tobias Friedrich,et al.  Approximating the Least Hypervolume Contributor: NP-Hard in General, But Fast in Practice , 2009, EMO.

[3]  Tobias Friedrich,et al.  Approximating the Volume of Unions and Intersections of High-Dimensional Geometric Objects , 2008, ISAAC.

[4]  Stefan Roth,et al.  Covariance Matrix Adaptation for Multi-objective Optimization , 2007, Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Eckart Zitzler,et al.  Indicator-Based Selection in Multiobjective Search , 2004, PPSN.

[6]  Lucas Bradstreet,et al.  Heuristics for optimizing the calculation of hypervolume for multi-objective optimization problems , 2005, 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  W. Rudin Real and complex analysis , 1968 .

[8]  T. C. Edwin Cheng,et al.  Bicriterion Single Machine Scheduling with Resource Dependent Processing Times , 1998, SIAM J. Optim..

[9]  Joshua D. Knowles,et al.  Bounded archiving using the lebesgue measure , 2003, The 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, 2003. CEC '03..

[10]  Anne Auger,et al.  Theory of the hypervolume indicator: optimal μ-distributions and the choice of the reference point , 2009, FOGA '09.

[11]  Sergei Vassilvitskii,et al.  Efficiently computing succinct trade-off curves , 2005, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[12]  Nicola Beume,et al.  Multi-objective optimisation using S-metric selection: application to three-dimensional solution spaces , 2005, 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[13]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  The Hypervolume Indicator Revisited: On the Design of Pareto-compliant Indicators Via Weighted Integration , 2007, EMO.

[14]  Eckart Zitzler,et al.  HypE: An Algorithm for Fast Hypervolume-Based Many-Objective Optimization , 2011, Evolutionary Computation.

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

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

[17]  Nicola Beume,et al.  S-Metric Calculation by Considering Dominated Hypervolume as Klee's Measure Problem , 2009, Evolutionary Computation.

[18]  Arturo Hernández-Aguirre,et al.  G-Metric: an M-ary quality indicator for the evaluation of non-dominated sets , 2008, GECCO 2008.

[19]  Frank Neumann,et al.  Multiplicative approximations and the hypervolume indicator , 2009, GECCO.

[20]  Mihalis Yannakakis,et al.  How Good is the Chord Algorithm? , 2010, SODA.

[21]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Evaluating the -Domination Based Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm for a Quick Computation of Pareto-Optimal Solutions , 2005, Evolutionary Computation.

[22]  Nicola Beume,et al.  SMS-EMOA: Multiobjective selection based on dominated hypervolume , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[23]  Mihalis Yannakakis,et al.  Small Approximate Pareto Sets for Biobjective Shortest Paths and Other Problems , 2009, SIAM J. Comput..

[24]  Ning Mao,et al.  A Fast Algorithm for Computing the Contribution of a Point to the Hypervolume , 2007, Third International Conference on Natural Computation (ICNC 2007).

[25]  Mihalis Yannakakis,et al.  On the approximability of trade-offs and optimal access of Web sources , 2000, Proceedings 41st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[26]  Nicola Beume,et al.  An EMO Algorithm Using the Hypervolume Measure as Selection Criterion , 2005, EMO.

[27]  Rajeev Kumar,et al.  Running Time Analysis of a Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm on Simple and Hard Problems , 2005, FOGA.

[28]  David W. Corne,et al.  Properties of an adaptive archiving algorithm for storing nondominated vectors , 2003, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[29]  Anne Auger,et al.  Investigating and exploiting the bias of the weighted hypervolume to articulate user preferences , 2009, GECCO.

[30]  W. Rudin Real and complex analysis, 3rd ed. , 1987 .

[31]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review , 2003, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..