Skip to main content

Improvement of Reference Points for Decomposition Based Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithms

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 10593))

Abstract

A multi-objective optimization problem (MOP) involves simultaneous minimization or maximization of more than one conflicting objectives. Such problems are commonly encountered in a number of domains, such as engineering, finance, operations research, etc. In the recent years, algorithms based on decomposition have shown commendable success in solving MOPs. In particular they have been helpful in overcoming the limitation of Pareto-dominance based ranking when the number of objectives is large. Decomposition based evolutionary algorithms divide an MOP into a number of simpler sub-problems and solve them simultaneously in a cooperative manner. In order to define the sub-problems, a reference point is needed to construct reference vectors in the objective space to guide the corresponding sub-populations. However, the effect of the choice of this reference point has been scarcely studied in literature. Most of the existing works simply construct the reference point using the minimum objective values in the current nondominated population. Some of the recent studies have gone beyond and suggested the use of optimistic, pessimistic or dynamic reference point specification. In this study, we first qualitatively examine the implications of using different strategies to construct the reference points. Thereafter, we suggest an alternative method which relies on identifying promising reference points rather than specifying them. In the proposed approach, each objective is individually minimized in order to estimate a point close to the true ideal point to identify such reference points. Some initial results and analysis are presented to demonstrate the potential benefits and limitations of the approach. Overall, the approach demonstrates promising results but needs further development for achieving more significant improvements in solving MOPs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Without loss of generality, all objectives are considered to be minimized in this study.

  2. 2.

    The performance using \(\mathbf {z}^R=\mathbf {z}^I\) is reported to be marginally inferior to \(\varepsilon =1\) for L-WFG and \(\varepsilon =5\) for K-WFG in [19]. There is a possibility that this minor variation could have resulted due to finite population size, stochastic nature of the search, as well as the nature of the HV metric itself (i.e. a higher HV doesn’t necessarily always imply better distribution).

References

  1. Asafuddoula, M., Ray, T., Sarker, R.: A decomposition-based evolutionary algorithm for many-objective optimization. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 19(3), 445–460 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bader, J., Zitzler, E.: HypE: an algorithm for fast hypervolume-based many-objective optimization. Evol. Comput. 19, 45–76 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bhattacharjee, K.S., Singh, H.K., Ray, T.: A novel decomposition-based evolutionary algorithm for engineering design optimization. J. Mech. Des. 139(4), 041403 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., Meyarivan, T.: A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 6(2), 182–197 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Deb, K.: Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms. Wiley, Hoboken (2005)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Giagkiozis, I., Purshouse, R.C., Fleming, P.J.: Towards understanding the cost of adaptation in decomposition-based optimization algorithms. In: IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), pp. 615–620 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Goulart, F., Campelo, F.: Preference-guided evolutionary algorithms for many-objective optimization. Inf. Sci. 329, 236–255 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hughes, E.J.: Multiple single objective Pareto sampling. IEEE Congr. Evol. Comput. 4, 2678–2684 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ishibuchi, H., Tsukamoto, N., Nojima, Y.: Evolutionary many-objective optimization: a short review. In: IEEE World Congress Computational Intelligence, pp. 2419–2426 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ishibuchi, H., Doi, K., Nojima, Y.: Reference point specification in MOEA/D for multi-objective and many-objective problems. In: IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 4015–4020 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ishibuchi, H., Setoguchi, Y., Masuda, H., Nojima, Y.: Performance of decomposition-based many-objective algorithms strongly depends on pareto front shapes. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 21(2), 169–190 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Köppen, M., Yoshida, K.: Substitute distance assignments in NSGA-II for handling many-objective optimization problems. In: Obayashi, S., Deb, K., Poloni, C., Hiroyasu, T., Murata, T. (eds.) EMO 2007. LNCS, vol. 4403, pp. 727–741. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-70928-2_55

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Qi, Y., Ma, X., Liu, F., Jiao, L., Sun, J., Wu, J.: MOEA/D with adaptive weight adjustment. Evol. Comput. 22(2), 231–264 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ray, T., Asafuddoula, M., Singh, H.K., Alam, K.: An approach to identify six sigma robust solutions of multi/many-objective engineering design optimization problems. J. Mech. Des. 137(5), 051404 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Saxena, D.K., Duro, J.A., Tiwari, A., Deb, K., Zhang, Q.: Objective reduction in many-objective optimization: linear and nonlinear algorithms. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 17(1), 77–99 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Singh, H.K., Isaacs, A., Ray, T.: A Pareto corner search evolutionary algorithm and dimensionality reduction in many-objective optimization problems. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 15(4), 539–556 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Singh, H.K., Isaacs, A., Ray, T., Smith, W.: An improved secondary ranking for many objective optimization problems. In: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pp. 1837–1838 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Trivedi, A., Srinivasan, D., Sanyal, K., Ghosh, A.: A survey of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms based on decomposition. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 21(3), 440–462 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wang, R., Xiong, J., Ishibuchi, H., Wu, G., Zhang, T.: On the effect of reference point in MOEA/D for multi-objective optimization. Appl. Soft Comput. 58, 25–34 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhang, Q., Li, H.: MOEA/D: a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 11(6), 712–731 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zitzler, E., Laumanns, M., Thiele, L.: SPEA2: improving the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm for multi-objective optimisation. In: Evolutionary Methods for Design, pp. 95–100. Optimisation and Control with Application to Industrial Problems (2002)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author would like to acknowledge the Australian Bicentennial Fellowship from the Menzies Centre, Kings College London, which supported his research visit to the University of Birmingham for this work, where the second author holds a concurrent position. The work was also partially supported by Science and Technology Innovation Committee Foundation of Shenzhen (Grant No. ZDSYS201703031748284) and NSFC (Grant No. 61329302).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hemant Kumar Singh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Singh, H.K., Yao, X. (2017). Improvement of Reference Points for Decomposition Based Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithms. In: Shi, Y., et al. Simulated Evolution and Learning. SEAL 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10593. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68759-9_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68759-9_24

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-68758-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-68759-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics