From the Publisher:
Evolutionary algorithms are relatively new, but very powerful techniques used to find solutions to many real-world search and optimization problems. Many of these problems have multiple objectives, which leads to the need to obtain a set of optimal solutions, known as effective solutions. It has been found that using evolutionary algorithms is a highly effective way of finding multiple effective solutions in a single simulation run. · Comprehensive coverage of this growing area of research · Carefully introduces each algorithm with examples and in-depth discussion · Includes many applications to real-world problems, including engineering design and scheduling · Includes discussion of advanced topics and future research · Features exercises and solutions, enabling use as a course text or for self-study · Accessible to those with limited knowledge of classical multi-objective optimization and evolutionary algorithms The integrated presentation of theory, algorithms and examples will benefit those working and researching in the areas of optimization, optimal design and evolutionary computing. This text provides an excellent introduction to the use of evolutionary algorithms in multi-objective optimization, allowing use as a graduate course text or for self-study.

/pdf/multi-objective-optimization-using-evolutionary-algorithms-3s4wdjzqsa.pdf

Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms

Decomposition is a basic strategy in traditional multiobjective optimization. However, it has not yet been widely used in multiobjective evolutionary optimization. This paper proposes a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition (MOEA/D). It decomposes a multiobjective optimization problem into a number of scalar optimization subproblems and optimizes them simultaneously. Each subproblem is optimized by only using information from its several neighboring subproblems, which makes MOEA/D have lower computational complexity at each generation than MOGLS and nondominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II). Experimental results have demonstrated that MOEA/D with simple decomposition methods outperforms or performs similarly to MOGLS and NSGA-II on multiobjective 0-1 knapsack problems and continuous multiobjective optimization problems. It has been shown that MOEA/D using objective normalization can deal with disparately-scaled objectives, and MOEA/D with an advanced decomposition method can generate a set of very evenly distributed solutions for 3-objective test instances. The ability of MOEA/D with small population, the scalability and sensitivity of MOEA/D have also been experimentally investigated in this paper.

/pdf/moea-d-a-multiobjective-evolutionary-algorithm-based-on-1ocq44zhaf.pdf

MOEA/D: A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Decomposition

List of Figures. List of Tables. Preface. Foreword. 1. Basic Concepts. 2. Evolutionary Algorithm MOP Approaches. 3. MOEA Test Suites. 4. MOEA Testing and Analysis. 5. MOEA Theory and Issues. 3. MOEA Theoretical Issues. 6. Applications. 7. MOEA Parallelization. 8. Multi-Criteria Decision Making. 9. Special Topics. 10. Epilog. Appendix A: MOEA Classification and Technique Analysis. Appendix B: MOPs in the Literature. Appendix C: Ptrue & PFtrue for Selected Numeric MOPs. Appendix D: Ptrue & PFtrue for Side-Constrained MOPs. Appendix E: MOEA Software Availability. Appendix F: MOEA-Related Information. Index. References.

/pdf/evolutionary-algorithms-for-solving-multi-objective-problems-2txxk4mqci.pdf

Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-objective problems

The Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm (SPEA) (Zitzler and Thiele 1999) is a relatively recent technique for finding or approximating the Pareto-optimal set for multiobjective optimization problems. In different studies (Zitzler and Thiele 1999; Zitzler, Deb, and Thiele 2000) SPEA has shown very good performance in comparison to other multiobjective evolutionary algorithms, and therefore it has been a point of reference in various recent investigations, e.g., (Corne, Knowles, and Oates 2000). Furthermore, it has been used in different applications, e.g., (Lahanas, Milickovic, Baltas, and Zamboglou 2001). In this paper, an improved version, namely SPEA2, is proposed, which incorporates in contrast to its predecessor a fine-grained fitness assignment strategy, a density estimation technique, and an enhanced archive truncation method. The comparison of SPEA2 with SPEA and two other modern elitist methods, PESA and NSGA-II, on different test problems yields promising results.

SPEA2: Improving the strength pareto evolutionary algorithm

In this paper, we provide a systematic comparison of various evolutionary approaches to multiobjective optimization using six carefully chosen test functions. Each test function involves a particular feature that is known to cause difficulty in the evolutionary optimization process, mainly in converging to the Pareto-optimal front (e.g., multimodality and deception). By investigating these different problem features separately, it is possible to predict the kind of problems to which a certain technique is or is not well suited. However, in contrast to what was suspected beforehand, the experimental results indicate a hierarchy of the algorithms under consideration. Furthermore, the emerging effects are evidence that the suggested test functions provide sufficient complexity to compare multiobjective optimizers. Finally, elitism is shown to be an important factor for improving evolutionary multiobjective search.

/pdf/comparison-of-multiobjective-evolutionary-algorithms-2a3t2yk6ku.pdf

Comparison of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Empirical Results

An important issue in multiobjective optimization is the quantitative comparison of the performance of different algorithms. In the case of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms, the outcome is usually an approximation of the Pareto-optimal set, which is denoted as an approximation set, and therefore the question arises of how to evaluate the quality of approximation sets. Most popular are methods that assign each approximation set a vector of real numbers that reflect different aspects of the quality. Sometimes, pairs of approximation sets are also considered. In this study, we provide a rigorous analysis of the limitations underlying this type of quality assessment. To this end, a mathematical framework is developed which allows one to classify and discuss existing techniques.

/pdf/performance-assessment-of-multiobjective-optimizers-an-wf8l3c8h73.pdf

Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review

SPEA2: Improving the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm For Multiobjective Optimization

After adequately demonstrating the ability to solve dierent two-objective optimization problems, multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) must now show their ecacy in handling problems having more than two objectives. In this paper, we have suggested three dierent approaches for systematically designing test problems for this purpose. The simplicity of construction, scalability to any number of decision variables and objectives, knowledge of exact shape and location of the resulting Pareto-optimal front, and introduction of controlled diculties in both converging to the true Pareto-optimal front and maintaining a widely distributed set of solutions are the main features of the suggested test problems. Because of the above features, they should be found useful in various research activities on MOEAs, such as testing the performance of a new MOEA, comparing dierent MOEAs, and better understanding of the working principles of MOEAs.

/pdf/scalable-test-problems-for-evolutionary-multiobjective-278lk39pfq.pdf

Scalable Test Problems for Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization

After adequately demonstrating the ability to solve different two-objective optimization problems, multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) must show their efficacy in handling problems having more than two objectives. In this paper, we suggest three different approaches for systematically designing test problems for this purpose. The simplicity of construction, scalability to any number of decision variables and objectives, knowledge of exact shape and location of the resulting Pareto-optimal front, and ability to control difficulties in both converging to the true Pareto-optimal front and maintaining a widely distributed set of solutions are the main features of the suggested test problems. Because of these features, they should be useful in various research activities on MOEAs, such as testing the performance of a new MOEA, comparing different MOEAs, and having a better understanding of the working principles of MOEAs.

Marco Laumanns

Papers

SPEA2: Improving the strength pareto evolutionary algorithm

Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review

SPEA2: Improving the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm For Multiobjective Optimization

Scalable Test Problems for Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization

Scalable multi-objective optimization test problems