Abstract
In this paper, a novel multi-objective artificial sheep algorithm (MOASA) is proposed. The basic search idea of MOASA inherits from the BASA, which is inspired by the social behavior of sheep herd, while some modifications are made to extend the algorithm to multi-objective problems. The Pareto-based theory is adopted in the MOASA along with external archive and leader selection mechanism to bring about multi-objective optimization. Furthermore, a novel neighborhood search method is proposed and applied to the external archive to enhance the performance of the algorithm. The proposed MOASA is then tested on 17 multi-objective benchmark problems to verify its efficiency and effectiveness by comparing with six powerful multi-objective optimization algorithms (MOAs). Experimental results show that the MOASA is generally superior to its competitors in solving those benchmark problems in terms of convergence and Pareto front distribution.

























Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.Abbreviations
- SI:
-
Swarm intelligence
- SOO:
-
Single-objective optimization
- SOP:
-
Single-objective optimization problem
- MOO:
-
Multi-objective optimization
- MOP:
-
Multi-objective optimization problem
- MOA:
-
Multi-objective optimization algorithm
- GA:
-
Genetic algorithm
- NSGA:
-
Non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm
- SPEA:
-
Strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm
- NSGA-II:
-
Fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm
- MOEA/D:
-
Multi-objective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition
- MOEA:
-
Multi-objective evolutionary algorithm
- BASA:
-
Binary artificial sheep algorithm
- MOPSO:
-
Multi-objective particle swarm optimization
- MOGSA:
-
Multi-objective gravitational search algorithm
- MOASA:
-
Multi-objective artificial sheep algorithm
- MOABC:
-
Multi-objective artificial bee colony algorithm
- MODA:
-
Multi-objective dragonfly algorithm
- MOGWO:
-
Multi-objective gray wolf optimizer
- MODA:
-
Multi-objective dragonfly algorithm
- MOPSO:
-
Multi-objective particle swarm optimization
- MOACO:
-
Multi-objective ant colony optimization
- MOPSDE:
-
Multi-objective particle swarm-differential algorithm
- GD:
-
Generational distance
- IGD:
-
Inverted generational distance
- MS:
-
Maximum spread
- SF:
-
Superiority of feasible solution
- SEEH:
-
Short-term economic environmental hydrothermal scheduling
References
Fonseca CM, Fleming PJ (1995) An overview of evolutionary algorithms in multi-objective optimization. Evol Comput 3(1):1–16
Coello CAC (1999) A comprehensive survey of evolutionary-based multi-objective optimization techniques. Knowl Inf Syst 1(3):269–308
Deb K, Kalyanmoy D (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Wiley, New York
Sawaragi Y, Nakayama H, Tanino T (2010) Theory of multi-objective optimization. Academic Press, London
Cass D (1965) Optimum growth in an aggregative model of capital accumulation. Rev Econ Stud 32(32):233–240
Sun CCI (1998) Use of vehicle signature analysis and lexicographic optimization for vehicle reidentification on freeways, vol 7. University of California, Irvine, pp 167–185
Aghaei J, Amjady N, Shayanfar HA (2011) Multi-objective electricity market clearing considering dynamic security by lexicographic optimization and augmented epsilon constraint method. Appl Soft Comput 11(4):3846–3858
Zhou A, Qu BY, Li H, Zhao SZ, Suganthan PN, Zhang Q (2011) Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms: a survey of the state-of-the-art. J Swarm Evol Comput 1(1):32–49
Guliashki V, Toshev H, Korsemov C (2009) Survey of evolutionary algorithms used in multi-objective optimization. J Probl Eng Cybern Robot 60:42–54
Sierra MR, 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
Coello CAC, Pulido G, Lechuga M (2004) Handling multiple objectives with particle swarm optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 8(3):256–279
Hassanzadeh H, Rouhani M (2010) A multi-objective gravitational search algorithm. In: International conference on computational intelligence, communication systems and networks. Liverpool, pp 7–12
Akbari R, Hedayatzadeh R, Ziarati K, Hassanizadeh B (2012) A multi-objective artificial bee colony algorithm. Swarm Evol Comput 1:39–52
Mirjalili S, Saremi S, Mirjalili S (2016) Multi-objective grey wolf optimizer: a novel algorithm for multi-criterion optimization. Expert Syst Appl 47:106–119
Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on neural networks, pp 1942–1948
Wolpert D, Macready W (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 1(1):67–82
Jiang Q, Wang L, Hei X, Yu XG, Lin Y, Lu X (2016) MOEA/D-ASA + SBX: a new multi-objective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition with artificial raindrop algorithm and simulated binary crossover. Knowl Based Syst 107:197–218
Cai D, Yuping W (2015) A new uniform evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition and CDAS for many-objective optimization. Knowl Based Syst 85(1):131–142
Sun G, Zhang A, Jia X (2016) DMMOGSA: diversity-enhanced and memory-based multi-objective gravitational search algorithm. Inf Sci 363:52–71
Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: nSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197
Srinivas N, Deb K (1995) Multi-objective function optimization using non-dominated sorting genetic algorithms. Evol Comput 2(3):221–248
Zitzler E, Thiele L (1999) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3(4):257–271
Zhang Q, Li H (2007) MOEA/D: a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 11(6):712–731
Glover F, Kochenberger GA (2010) Handbook of metaheuristics. Springer, Berlin
Jones DF, Mirrazavi SK, Tamiz M (2002) Multi-objective meta-heuristics: an overview of the current state-of-the-art. Eur J Oper Res 137(1):1–9
Talbi EG (2009) Metaheuristics: from design to implementation, In Proc. SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng 42(4):497–541
Coello CAC, Lechuga MS (2002) MOPSO: a proposal for multiple objective particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the Congress on evolutionary computation (CEC’2002), vol 1, pp 1051–1056
Mousa AA, El-Shorbagy MA, Abd-El-Wahed WF (2012) Local search based hybrid particle swarm optimization algorithm for multi-objective optimization. Swarm Evol Comput 3:1–14
Benameur L, Alami J, Imrani AHE (2009) A new hybrid particle swarm optimization algorithm for handling multi-objective problem using fuzzy clustering technique. In: International conference on computational intelligence, modelling and simulation. IEEE, pp 48–53
Sahoo NC, Ganguly S, Das D (2011) Simple heuristics-based selection of local guides for multi-objective PSO with an application to electrical distribution system planning. Eng Appl Artif Intell Elsevier 24(4):567–585
Ganguly S, Sahoo NC, Das D (2013) Multi-objective particle swarm optimization based on fuzzy-Pareto-dominance for possibilistic planning of electrical distribution systems incorporating distributed generation. Fuzzy Sets Syst Elsevier 213:47–73
Hassanzadeh HR, Rouhani M (2010) A multi-objective gravitational search algorithm. Int Conf Comput Intell 12:7–12
Rashedi E, Nezamabadi-Pour H, Saryazdi S (2012) GSA: a gravitational search algorithm. Intell Inf Manag 4(6):390–395
Alaya I, Solnon C, Ghedira K (2017) Ant colony optimization for multi-objective optimization problems. In: IEEE international conference on TOOLS with artificial intelligence, pp 450–457
Mirjalili S (2016) Dragonfly algorithm: a new meta-heuristic optimization technique for solving single-objective, discrete, and multi-objective problems. Neural Comput Appl 27(4):1053–1073
Scharfstein DS, Stein JC (1990) Herd behavior and investment. Am Econ Rev 80(3):465–479
Bonabeau E (1999) Swarm intelligence: from natural to artificial systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Tarasewich P, Mcmullen PR (2002) Swarm intelligence. Commun ACM 45(8):62–67
Wang W, Li C, Liao X, Qin H (2017) Study on unit commitment problem considering pumped storage and renewable energy via a novel binary artificial sheep algorithm. Appl Energy 187:612–626
Zhang Q, Zhou A, Zhao S, Suganthan PN, Liu W, Tiwari S (2009) Multi-objective optimization test instances for the CEC 2009 special session and competition, University of Essex, 2009
Qu BY, Suganthan PN (2011) Constrained multi-objective optimization algorithm with ensemble of constraint handling methods. Eng Optim 43(4):403–416
Van Veldhuizen DA, Lamont GB (1998) Multi-objective evolutionary algorithm research: a history and analysis. Evol Comput 8(2):125–147
Sierra MR, Coello CAC (2005) Improving PSO-based multi-objective optimization using crowding, mutation and ∈-dominance. In: Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization. Springer, Berlin
Su YX, Chi R (2017) Multi-objective particle swarm-differential evolution algorithm. Neural Comput Appl 28(2):1–12
Cheng R, Jin YC (2015) A social learning particle swarm optimization algorithm for scalable optimization. Inf Sci 291(10):43–60
Basu M (2004) An interactive fuzzy satisfying method based on evolutionary programming technique for multi-objective short-term hydrothermal scheduling. Electr Power Syst Res 69(2–3):277–285
Acknowledgements
This paper is supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFC0401905) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 51679095, 51479076).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
The initial parameters of MOASA are as follows:
MaxIter | Equal to 300,000 function evaluations |
MaxTrial = 100 | Max invalid trial |
N = 100 | Number of population |
\(N_{\text{rep}} = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}l} {100} \hfill \\ {150} \hfill \\ \end{array} } \right.\) | Maximum number of repository for bi-objective test problems |
Maximum number of repository for tri-objective test problems | |
nGrid = 100 | Number of grids per dimension |
\(\alpha = 0.1\) | Grid inflation parameter |
\(\beta = 2\) | Leader selection pressure |
\(\gamma = 2\) | Deletion selection pressure |
For MOGWO, the following initial parameters are chosen:
MaxIter | Equal to 300,000 function evaluations |
N = 100 | Number of population |
\(N_{\text{rep}} = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}l} {100} \hfill \\ {150} \hfill \\ \end{array} } \right.\) | Maximum number of repository for bi-objective test problems |
Maximum number of repository for tri-objective test problems | |
nGrid = 10 | Number of grids per dimension |
\(\alpha = 0.1\) | Grid inflation parameter |
\(\beta = 2\) | Leader selection pressure |
\(\gamma = 2\) | Deletion selection pressure |
For MOPSO, the initial parameters are as follows:
MaxIter | Equal to 300,000 function evaluations |
N = 100 | Number of population |
\(N_{\text{rep}} = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}l} {100} \hfill \\ {150} \hfill \\ \end{array} } \right.\) | Maximum number of repository for bi-objective test problems |
Maximum number of repository for tri-objective test problems | |
nGrid = 10 | Number of grids per dimension |
\(\alpha = 0.1\) | Grid inflation parameter |
\(\beta = 2\) | Leader selection pressure |
\(\gamma = 2\) | Deletion selection pressure |
\(\varphi_{1} = 2.05\) | |
\(\varphi_{2} = 2.05\) | |
\(\varphi = 4.1\) | |
\(w = \frac{2}{{\varphi - 2 + \sqrt {\varphi^{2} - 4\varphi } }}\) | Inertia weight |
\(c_{1} = \chi \cdot \varphi_{1}\) | Personal coefficient |
\(c_{2} = \chi \cdot \varphi_{2}\) | Social coefficient |
For MOEA/D, the following parameters are used:
MaxIter | Equal to 300,000 function evaluations |
N = 100 | Number of population |
T = 0.1N | Number of neighbors |
nr = 0.01N | Maximal copies of a new child in update |
\(\delta = 0.9\) | Probability of selecting parents from the neighborhood |
CR = 0.5 | Crossover probability |
\(\eta = 30\) | Distribution index |
For NSGA-II, the following parameters are chosen:
MaxIter | Equal to 300,000 function evaluations |
N = 100 | Number of population |
pool = 0.1N | Size of mating pool |
\(\gamma = 0.01N\) | Crossover probability |
\(\lambda = 0.9\) | Mutation probability |
\(\mu_{\text{c}} = 0.5\) | Crossover distribution index |
\(\mu_{\text{m}} = 30\) | Mutation distribution index |
Appendix 3
The detailed results of hydrothermal system in scheme 9.
Period | Water discharge (104 m3/h) | Hydro output (MW) | Thermal output (MW) | Total output (MW) | Power loss (MW) | Load demand (MW) | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Q h1 | Q h2 | Q h3 | Q h4 | P h1 | P h2 | P h3 | P h4 | P s1 | P s1 | P s1 | ||||
1 | 14.073 | 6.000 | 22.231 | 6.000 | 97.768 | 49.000 | 34.173 | 131.880 | 175.000 | 132.374 | 140.127 | 760.32 | 10.32 | 750 |
2 | 5.000 | 6.000 | 23.887 | 6.000 | 51.575 | 50.164 | 19.183 | 129.027 | 175.000 | 227.987 | 139.113 | 792.05 | 12.05 | 780 |
3 | 8.276 | 6.000 | 21.012 | 6.000 | 76.800 | 51.296 | 30.012 | 125.744 | 170.142 | 126.998 | 128.458 | 709.45 | 9.45 | 700 |
4 | 5.000 | 6.000 | 18.199 | 6.000 | 52.426 | 52.934 | 41.047 | 121.625 | 175.000 | 127.801 | 87.812 | 658.64 | 8.64 | 650 |
5 | 5.032 | 6.000 | 18.108 | 6.000 | 53.114 | 54.500 | 39.425 | 115.822 | 174.992 | 106.277 | 135.484 | 679.61 | 9.61 | 670 |
6 | 5.000 | 6.000 | 20.965 | 6.415 | 53.021 | 55.504 | 26.578 | 136.565 | 174.648 | 229.842 | 135.760 | 811.92 | 11.92 | 800 |
7 | 12.546 | 6.000 | 18.243 | 6.000 | 96.914 | 55.994 | 36.271 | 145.619 | 174.999 | 299.944 | 154.678 | 964.42 | 14.42 | 950 |
8 | 10.277 | 6.000 | 18.685 | 10.098 | 87.269 | 55.994 | 32.821 | 210.380 | 175.000 | 299.999 | 163.339 | 1024.80 | 14.80 | 1010 |
9 | 12.199 | 9.133 | 19.518 | 18.531 | 93.567 | 76.432 | 26.735 | 296.256 | 174.910 | 296.424 | 140.053 | 1104.38 | 14.38 | 1090 |
10 | 15.000 | 6.000 | 17.535 | 20.000 | 96.716 | 55.929 | 34.681 | 305.176 | 171.815 | 288.536 | 141.127 | 1093.98 | 13.98 | 1080 |
11 | 7.859 | 9.603 | 18.625 | 18.403 | 71.809 | 79.897 | 30.501 | 295.909 | 175.000 | 300.000 | 162.039 | 1115.16 | 15.16 | 1100 |
12 | 12.161 | 6.000 | 19.518 | 18.685 | 92.550 | 57.074 | 26.891 | 297.679 | 175.000 | 300.000 | 218.604 | 1167.80 | 17.80 | 1150 |
13 | 7.402 | 10.543 | 19.988 | 19.518 | 69.561 | 85.232 | 27.637 | 303.076 | 174.608 | 299.732 | 165.474 | 1125.32 | 15.32 | 1110 |
14 | 5.000 | 6.000 | 19.518 | 18.428 | 52.103 | 56.819 | 28.891 | 295.926 | 174.084 | 297.296 | 139.027 | 1044.15 | 14.15 | 1030 |
15 | 8.658 | 12.425 | 19.048 | 18.155 | 80.610 | 93.139 | 33.176 | 293.151 | 174.924 | 217.749 | 129.469 | 1022.22 | 12.22 | 1010 |
16 | 6.884 | 10.783 | 19.518 | 19.988 | 69.357 | 84.741 | 30.021 | 305.499 | 161.799 | 277.997 | 143.675 | 1073.09 | 13.09 | 1060 |
17 | 5.000 | 11.362 | 19.098 | 19.096 | 54.258 | 85.636 | 31.011 | 299.504 | 172.058 | 287.195 | 133.983 | 1063.64 | 13.64 | 1050 |
18 | 11.862 | 10.543 | 14.201 | 19.518 | 98.296 | 79.564 | 43.821 | 303.076 | 174.989 | 295.885 | 138.708 | 1134.34 | 14.34 | 1120 |
19 | 12.770 | 6.000 | 10.000 | 19.048 | 99.805 | 50.512 | 46.386 | 300.085 | 163.584 | 281.699 | 141.076 | 1083.15 | 13.15 | 1070 |
20 | 5.000 | 7.880 | 10.000 | 19.518 | 53.445 | 63.467 | 48.269 | 303.076 | 175.000 | 213.709 | 208.193 | 1065.16 | 15.16 | 1050 |
21 | 5.000 | 15.000 | 10.000 | 19.098 | 53.609 | 91.248 | 51.741 | 300.407 | 174.543 | 110.439 | 138.645 | 920.63 | 10.63 | 910 |
22 | 5.000 | 6.000 | 10.000 | 17.991 | 53.911 | 47.640 | 54.754 | 292.856 | 171.548 | 119.004 | 130.407 | 870.12 | 10.12 | 860 |
23 | 5.000 | 14.305 | 10.000 | 18.331 | 54.302 | 87.791 | 55.256 | 291.519 | 174.894 | 145.548 | 50.000 | 859.31 | 9.31 | 850 |
24 | 5.000 | 12.425 | 18.671 | 17.879 | 54.705 | 78.281 | 49.446 | 279.941 | 171.379 | 124.894 | 50.000 | 808.65 | 8.65 | 800 |
Fuel cost ($): 45,812.66 | Emission (lb): 18,238.74 |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lai, X., Li, C., Zhang, N. et al. A multi-objective artificial sheep algorithm. Neural Comput & Applic 31, 4049–4083 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3348-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3348-x