Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing

ICAISC 2018: Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing pp 345–362Cite as

Comparison of Constraint Handling Approaches in Multi-objective Optimization

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

  • 2174 Accesses

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10841))

Abstract

When considering real-world optimization problems the possibility of encountering problems having constraints is quite high. Constraint handling approaches such as the penalty function and others have been researched and developed to incorporate an optimization problem’s constraints into the optimization process. With regards to multi-objective optimization, in this paper the two main approaches of incorporating constraints are explored, namely: Penalty functions and dominance based selection operators. This paper aims to measure the effectiveness of these two approaches by comparing the empirical results produced by each approach. Each approach is tested using a set of ten benchmark problems, where each problem has certain constraints. The analysis of the results in this paper showed no overall statistical difference between the effectiveness of penalty functions and dominance based selection operators. However, significant statistical differences between the constraint handling approaches were found with regards to specific performance indicators.

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

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

References

  1. Zitzler, E., Thiele, L.: Multiobjective optimization using evolutionary algorithms—a comparative case study. In: Eiben, A.E., Bäck, T., Schoenauer, M., Schwefel, H.-P. (eds.) PPSN 1998. LNCS, vol. 1498, pp. 292–301. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0056872

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Konak, A., Coit, D.W., Smith, A.E.: Multi-objective optimization using genetic algorithms: a tutorial. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 91(9), 992–1007 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Coello Coello, C.A.: Evolutionary multi-objective optimization: a historical view of the field. IEEE Comput. Intell. Mag. 1(1), 28–36 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Miettinen, K.: Nonlinear Multiobjective Optimization. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (1999)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Marler, R., Arora, J.: Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 26(6), 369–395 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Coello Coello, C.A.: Theoretical and numerical constraint-handling techniques used with evolutionary algorithms: a survey of the state of the art. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 191(11), 1245–1287 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Coello Coello, C.A.: A survey of constraint handling techniques used with evolutionary algorithms. Lania-RI-99-04, Laboratorio Nacional de Informática Avanzada (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Le Riche, R., Knopf-Lenoir, C., Haftka, R.T.: A segregated genetic algorithm for constrained structural optimization. In: ICGA, pp. 558–565. Citeseer (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Joines, J.A., Houck, C.R.: On the use of non-stationary penalty functions to solve nonlinear constrained optimization problems with GA’s. In: Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation, IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, pp. 579–584. IEEE (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Coello Coello, C.A., Montes, E.M.: Constraint-handling in genetic algorithms through the use of dominance-based tournament selection. Adv. Eng. Inform. 16(3), 193–203 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Horn, J., Nafpliotis, N., Goldberg, D.E.: A niched Pareto genetic algorithm for multiobjective optimization. In: Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation, IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, pp. 82–87. IEEE (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Zitzler, E., Thiele, L.: Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 3(4), 257–271 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Abraham, A., Jain, L.: Evolutionary multiobjective optimization. In: Abraham, A., Jain, L., Goldberg, R. (eds.) Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization, pp. 1–6. Springer, London (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-137-7_1

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Sierra, M.R., Coello Coello, C.A.: Improving PSO-based multi-objective optimization using crowding, mutation and \(\in \)-dominance. In: Coello Coello, C.A., Hernández Aguirre, A., Zitzler, E. (eds.) EMO 2005. LNCS, vol. 3410, pp. 505–519. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-31880-4_35

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. 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 

  17. Kukkonen, S., Lampinen, J.: GDE3: the third evolution step of generalized differential evolution. In: The 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 1, pp. 443–450. IEEE (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Riquelme, N., Von Lücken, C., Baran, B.: Performance metrics in multi-objective optimization. In: Computing Conference (CLEI), 2015 Latin American, pp. 1–11. IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jmetal 5. https://jmetal.github.io/jMetal/. Accessed 03 May 2017

  20. Zhang, Q., Zhou, A., Zhao, S., Suganthan, P.N., Liu, W., Tiwari, S.: Multiobjective optimization test instances for the CEC 2009 special session and competition. University of Essex, Colchester, UK and Nanyang technological University, Singapore, Special Session on Performance Assessment of Multi-objective Optimization Algorithms, Technical report 264 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is based on the research supported by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa (Grant Number 46712). The opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this article is that of the author(s) alone, and not that of the NRF. The NRF accepts no liability whatsoever in this regard.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

    Rohan Hemansu Chhipa & Mardé Helbig

Authors
  1. Rohan Hemansu Chhipa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mardé Helbig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mardé Helbig .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Częstochowa University of Technology, Częstochowa, Poland

    Leszek Rutkowski

  2. Częstochowa University of Technology, Częstochowa, Poland

    Rafał Scherer

  3. Częstochowa University of Technology, Częstochowa, Poland

    Marcin Korytkowski

  4. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

    Witold Pedrycz

  5. AGH University of Science and Technology, Kraków, Poland

    Ryszard Tadeusiewicz

  6. University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA

    Jacek M. Zurada

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Chhipa, R.H., Helbig, M. (2018). Comparison of Constraint Handling Approaches in Multi-objective Optimization. In: Rutkowski, L., Scherer, R., Korytkowski, M., Pedrycz, W., Tadeusiewicz, R., Zurada, J. (eds) Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing. ICAISC 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10841. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91253-0_33

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91253-0_33

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91252-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91253-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation