Boosting Efficiency for Computing the Pareto Frontier on Tree Structured Networks

Multi-objective optimization plays a key role in the study of real-world problems, as they often involve multiple criteria. In multi-objective optimization it is important to identify the so-called Pareto frontier, which characterizes the trade-offs between the objectives of different solutions. We show how a divide-and-conquer approach, combined with batched processing and pruning, significantly boosts the performance of an exact and approximation dynamic programming (DP) algorithm for computing the Pareto frontier on tree-structured networks, proposed in [18]. We also show how exploiting restarts and a new instance selection strategy boosts the performance and accuracy of a mixed integer programming (MIP) approach for approximating the Pareto frontier. We provide empirical results demonstrating that our DP and MIP approaches have complementary strengths and outperform previous algorithms in efficiency and accuracy. Our work is motivated by a problem in computational sustainability concerning the evaluation of trade-offs in ecosystem services due to the proliferation of hydropower dams throughout the Amazon basin. Our approaches are general and can be applied to computing the Pareto frontier of a variety of multi-objective problems on tree-structured networks.

[1]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Search in a Small World , 1999, IJCAI.

[2]  Xavier Gandibleux,et al.  A survey and annotated bibliography of multiobjective combinatorial optimization , 2000, OR Spectr..

[3]  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.

[4]  Marco Gavanelli,et al.  An Algorithm for Multi-Criteria Optimization in CSPs , 2002, ECAI.

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

[6]  Bart Selman,et al.  Heavy-Tailed Phenomena in Satisfiability and Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 2000, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[7]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Analysis of an Algorithm for Identifying Pareto Points in Multi-Dimensional Data Sets , 2004 .

[8]  T. Simpson,et al.  Algorithms to identify pareto points in multi-dimensional data sets , 2004 .

[9]  Frank Neumann Expected Runtimes of a Simple Evolutionary Algorithm for the Multi-objective Minimum Spanning Tree Problem , 2004, PPSN.

[10]  Matthias Ehrgott,et al.  Multiple criteria decision making for engineering , 2008 .

[11]  C. Gomes Computational Sustainability: Computational methods for a sustainable environment, economy, and society , 2009 .

[12]  Mohamed El Bachir Menai,et al.  Data Structures in Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms , 2012, Journal of Computer Science and Technology.

[13]  Wanxing Sheng,et al.  An Improved Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm 2 with application to the optimization of distributed generations , 2012, Comput. Math. Appl..

[14]  S. Levin,et al.  Trading-off fish biodiversity, food security, and hydropower in the Mekong River Basin , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[15]  Clinton N. Jenkins,et al.  Proliferation of Hydroelectric Dams in the Andean Amazon and Implications for Andes-Amazon Connectivity , 2012, PloS one.

[16]  Pierre Schaus,et al.  Multi-Objective Large Neighborhood Search , 2013, CP.

[17]  K. Tockner,et al.  A global boom in hydropower dam construction , 2014, Aquatic Sciences.

[18]  Yang Yu,et al.  Pareto Ensemble Pruning , 2015, AAAI.

[19]  Zhi-Hua Zhou,et al.  Selection Hyper-heuristics Can Provably Be Helpful in Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization , 2016, PPSN.

[20]  J. Lundberg,et al.  Balancing hydropower and biodiversity in the Amazon, Congo, and Mekong , 2016, Science.

[21]  Vasco M. Manquinho,et al.  Introducing Pareto Minimal Correction Subsets , 2017, SAT.

[22]  Carla P. Gomes,et al.  Efficiently Approximating the Pareto Frontier: Hydropower Dam Placement in the Amazon Basin , 2018, AAAI.