Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

MO-NFSA for solving unconstrained multi-objective optimization problems

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Engineering with Computers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

A Correction to this article was published on 25 February 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

Normative Fish Swarm Algorithm (NFSA) is a novel variant of the Artificial Fish Swarm Algorithm (AFSA) proposed in 2019, and has been proven effective in solving single-objective optimization problems. Inspired by the potential of NFSA, this paper proposes an evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithm, namely “Multi-Objective Normative Fish Swarm Algorithm (MO-NFSA)”. However, due to the fact that NFSA was originally modeled for single-objective optimization, a certain degree of transformation, modification, and additional strategies (related to multi-objective optimization features) must be integrated into the original NFSA as part of MO-NFSA modeling for further extension. This article adopts a total of 15 multi-objective optimization test cases in any category of fixed-dimensional, non-fixed-dimensional (ZDT set) or scalable multi-objective (DTLZ set) optimization types. These multi-objective optimization test cases are used to compare the performance of MO-NFSA with other comparative algorithms. However, performance evaluation of multi-objective optimization is a daunting task. Their performance results can only be digitized through quality indicators (i.e., performance metrics), which are mainly tested from three different aspects of high-quality approximation: convergence, uniformity, and spread. Here, quality indicators including generation distance (GD), spacing (S), and spread-delta (∆/∆*) are used to check the quality performance of each algorithm based on the corresponding approximation. In the work, 20 simulations are run, and hence, 20 sets of data are collected. The collected results prove that MO-NFSA is superior to other comparison algorithms in all aspects of high-quality approximation. MO-NFSA can solve different types of multi-objective optimization problems.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

Availability of data and material

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article (and its supplementary information files).

Change history

References

  1. Cormen TH et al (1990) Introduction to algorithms. First edit Edition, Chapter 17 “Greedy Algorithms.” MIT Press, Cambridge

  2. Malik A, Sharma A (2013) Greedy algorithm. Int J Sci Res Publ 3(8):1–5

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mandal JK, Mukhopadhyay S, Dutta P (2018) Multi-objective optimization. In: Mandal JK, Mukhopadhyay S, Dutta P (Eds) 1st edition. Springer, Singapore

  4. Gunantara N, Ai Q (2018) A review of multi-objective optimization: methods and its applications. Cogent Eng 5(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1502242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ehrgott M (2012) Vilfredo Pareto and multi-objective optimization. Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung Extra 21:447–453

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Emmerich MTM, Deutz AH (2018) A tutorial on multiobjective optimization: fundamentals and evolutionary methods. Nat Comput 17(3):585–609

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Kitayama S, Yamazaki K (2012) Compromise point incorporating trade-off ratio in multi-objective optimization. Appl Soft Comput 12(8):1959–1964. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ASOC.2012.03.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Henig MI, Buchanan JT (1997) Tradeoff directions in multiobjective optimization problems. Math Program 78:357–374

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Ojha M et al (2019) A review of multi-objective optimisation and decision making using evolutionary algorithms. Int J Bio-Inspired Comput 14(2):69–84. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBIC.2019.101640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Trianni V, López-Ibáñez M (2014) Advantages of multi-objective optimisation in evolutionary robotics: survey and case studies. In: Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium

  11. Zitzler E et al (2003) Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 7(2):117–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hunter SR et al (2019) An introduction to multiobjective simulation optimization. ACM Trans Model Comput Simul (TOMACS) 29(1):1–36. https://doi.org/10.1145/3299872

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Bechikh S, Datta R, Gupta A (2017) Recent advances in evolutionary multi-objective optimization. In: Bechikh S, Datta R, Gupta A (eds) 1st edition. Springer International Publishing, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42978-6

  14. Parsopoulos K, Vrahatis MN (2008) Multi-objective particle swarm optimization approaches. In: Bui LT, Alam S (eds) Multi-objective optimization in computational intelligence: theory and practice. IGI Global, Hershey, pp 20–42. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.5189.4721

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. bin Mohd Zain MZ et al (2018) A multi-objective particle swarm optimization algorithm based on dynamic boundary search for constrained optimization. Appl Soft Comput 70:680–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ASOC.2018.06.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhai Y-K, Xu Y, Gan J-Y (2012) A novel artificial fish swarm algorithm based on multi-objective optimization. In: International conference on intelligent computing (ICIC) 2012—intelligent computing theories and applications, pp 67–73

  17. Jiang M, Zhu K (2011) Multiobjective optimization by Artificial Fish Swarm Algorithm. In: 2011 IEEE international conference on computer science and automation engineering, pp 506–511. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSAE.2011.5952729

  18. Tan W-H, Mohamad-Saleh J (2018) Normative improved artificial fish swarm algorithm (NIAFSA) for global optimization. Int J Innovat Technol Explor Eng 8(2):480–484

    Google Scholar 

  19. Tan W-H, Mohamad-Saleh J (2019) Normative fish swarm algorithm (NFSA) for optimization. Soft Comput 24:2083–2099. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00500-019-04040-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Savic D (2002) Single-objective vs. multiobjective optimisation for integrated decision support. In: Proceedings of the First Biennial meeting of the international environmental modelling and software society, pp 7–12

  21. Ishibuchi H, Nojima Y, Doi T (2006) Comparison between single-objective and multi-objective genetic algorithms: performance comparison and performance measures. In: CEC 2016: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 1143–1150. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2006.1688438

  22. Reyes-sierra M, Coello CAC (2006) Multi-objective particle swarm optimizers: a survey of the state-of-the-art. Int J Comput Intell Res 2(3):287–308. https://doi.org/10.5019/J.IJCIR.2006.68

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Moore JM, Chapman RC (1999) Application of particle swarm to multiobjective optimization. In: Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Auburn University, Auburn, USA

  24. Alvarez-Benitez JE, Everson RM, Fieldsend JE (2005) A MOPSO algorithm based exclusively on pareto dominance concepts. In: EMO ’05 proceedings of the third international conference on evolutionary multi-criterion Optimization, pp 459–473

  25. Mao M et al (2017) Comprehensive improvement of artificial fish swarm algorithm for global MPPT in PV system under partial shading conditions. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142331217697374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Duan Q et al (2016) An improved artificial fish swarm algorithm optimized by particle swarm optimization algorithm with extended memory. Kybernetes 45(2):210–222. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-09-2014-0198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Azizi R (2014) Empirical study of artificial fish swarm algorithm. Int J Comput Commun Netw 3(1):1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Raquel CR, Naval PC (2005) An effective use of crowding distance in multiobjective particle swarm optimization. In: GECCO ’05 Proceedings of the 7th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pp 257–264. https://doi.org/10.1145/1068009.1068047

  29. Özyön S, Yasar C, Temurtas H (2018) Incremental gravitational search algorithm for high-dimensional benchmark functions. Neural Comput Appl 31:3779–3803. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00521-017-3334-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Jamian JJ et al (2014) Global particle swarm optimization for high dimension numerical functions analysis. J Appl Math 2014:14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/329193

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Ouyang HB et al (2015) Teaching-learning based optimization with global crossover for global optimization problems. Appl Math Comput 265:533–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AMC.2015.05.012

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Akdemir D et al (2019) Multi-objective optimized genomic breeding strategies for sustainable food improvement. Heredity 122:672–683. https://doi.org/10.1038/S41437-018-0147-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kimovski D et al (2016) Multi-objective optimization framework for VMI distribution in federated cloud repositories. In: Euro-Par 2016: parallel processing workshops, Grenoble, France, pp 236–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58943-5_19

  34. Patil M (2018) Using external archive for improved performance in multi-objective optimization

  35. Kotb RM, Ewais AM, Hemeida AM (2019) Single and multi-objective optimization algorithms. Int J Appl Energy Syst 1(2):77–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Coello CAC, Pulido GT, Lechuga MS (2004) Handling multiple objectives with particle swarm optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 8(3):256–279. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2004.826067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Saini N (2017) Review of selection methods in genetic algorithms. Int J Eng Comput Sci 6(12):22261–22263. https://doi.org/10.18535/IJECS/V6I12.04

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lipowski A, Lipowska D (2011) Roulette-wheel selection via stochastic acceptance. Phys A 391(6):2193–2196. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PHYSA.2011.12.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Deb K et al (2000) A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization: NSGA-II. In: PPSN VI proceedings of the 6th international conference on parallel problem solving from nature, pp 849–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45356-3_83

  40. Schaffer JD (1984) Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In: Grefensette GJ, Erlbraum JJL (eds) Proceedings of the 1st international conference on genetic algorithms, pp 93–100

  41. Lim WJ, Jambek AB, Neoh SC (2015) Kursawe function optimisation using hybrid micro genetic algorithm (HMGA). Soft Comput 19:3571–3580. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00500-015-1767-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Coello CAC, Lamont GB, Van Veldhuizen DA (2006) Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-objective problems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Naranjani Y et al (2017) A hybrid method of evolutionary algorithm and simple cell mapping for multi-objective optimization problems. Int J Dyn Control 5:570–582. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40435-016-0250-1

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. Zitzler E, Deb K, Thiele L (2000) Comparison of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: empirical results. Evol Comput 8(2):173–195. https://doi.org/10.1162/106365600568202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Huband S et al (2006) A review of multiobjective test problems and a scalable test problem toolkit. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 10(5):477–506. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2005.861417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Bezerra LCT, López-Ibáñez M, Stützle T (2017) An empirical assessment of the properties of inverted generational distance on multi- and many-objective optimization. In: EMO 2017 9th international conference on evolutionary multi-criterion optimization, pp 31–45

  47. Cheng S, Shi Y, Qin Q (2012) On the performance metrics of multiobjective optimization (S. B. Heidelberg, Ed.). In: International conference in Swarm Intelligence (ICSI) 2012: advances in swarm intelligence, pp 504–512

  48. Riquelme N, Von Lücken C, Baran B (2015) Performance metrics in multi-objective optimization. In: 2015 Latin American computing conference (CLEI), pp 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/CLEI.2015.7360024

  49. Van Veldhuizen DA, Lamont GB (2000) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: analyzing the state-of-the-art. Evol Comput 8(2):125–147. https://doi.org/10.1162/106365600568158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Berrouk F et al (2018) A new multi-objective Jaya algorithm for solving the optimal power flow problem. J Electr Syst 14(3):165–181

    Google Scholar 

  51. Mirjalili S et al (2017) Optimization of problems with multiple objectives using the multi-verse optimization algorithm. Knowl-Based Syst 134:50–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.KNOSYS.2017.07.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Hu P et al (2011) Multiple swarms multi-objective particle swarm optimization based on decomposition. Procedia Eng 15:3371–3375. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROENG.2011.08.632

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is supported by the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) Malaysia Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (Grant no. 203.PELECT.6071317).

Funding

This work was financially funded by the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) Malaysia Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (Grant no. 203.PELECT.6071317).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Nibong Tebal, 11430, Penang, Malaysia

    Weng-Hooi Tan & Junita Mohamad-Saleh

Authors
  1. Weng-Hooi Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Junita Mohamad-Saleh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

W-HT conceived, developed and tested the formulated algorithm, collected and analyzed the data, and wrote this manuscript. JM-S validated the analytical methods and supervised the findings of this work. Both authors revised and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Junita Mohamad-Saleh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No author associated with this paper has disclosed any potential or pertinent conflicts which may be perceived to have impending conflict with this work.

Ethics approval

This research does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tan, WH., Mohamad-Saleh, J. MO-NFSA for solving unconstrained multi-objective optimization problems. Engineering with Computers 38, 2527–2548 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01223-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01223-4

Keywords

Profiles

  1. Weng-Hooi Tan View author profile
  2. Junita Mohamad-Saleh View author profile