Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A robust environmental selection strategy in decomposition based many-objective optimization

  • 1199: Computational Intelligence Revolution in Multimedia Data Analytics and Business Management
  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many researchers witness the efficiency of decomposition-based evolutionary multi- and many-objective optimization algorithms in finding quality solutions on problems with regular Pareto front. These decomposition-based evolutionary approaches profoundly depend on aggregation methods and weight vectors. Such algorithms fail to guarantee the diversity in the population, especially when dealing with irregular Pareto front, because some of the weight vectors become ineffective during simulation. Efforts are being made over time to frequently adopt the position of weight vectors at the rate of increased computation burden, in order to achieve improved solutions. Hence an alternative mechanism has been suggested in this paper. Instead of changing the weight vector, a better treatment on environmental selection is proposed that could effectively balance both convergence and diversity in solving both multi- and many-objective optimization problems. The higher rate of performance of the proposed algorithm has been validated over the comparative permanence with six popular state-of-the-art algorithms in terms of hypervolume, complemented with winning ratio using t-test. It is concluded in the latter part of this paper that the proposed method performs better while solving test suite problems with irregular Pareto fronts. Moreover, it is more prone towards better solutions with an increase in the number of objective functions in MaOPs.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Al-Dujaili A, Suresh S (2018) Multi-Objective Simultaneous Optimistic Optimization. Inf Sci (Ny) 424:159–174

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Bejinariu S, Costin H, Rotaru F, Luca R, Niţă C, Costin D (2017) Image enhancement by multiobjective optimization and bio-inspired heuristics. 2017 E-Health Bioengineering Conference (EHB) 442–445.

  3. Cheng R, Jin Y, Olhofer M, Sendhoff B (2016) A reference vector guided evolutionary algorithm for many-objective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 20:773–791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Das I, Dennis JE (1998) Normal-boundary intersection: a new method for generating the Pareto surface in nonlinear multicriteria optimization problems. SIAM J Optim 8:631–657

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Deb K (2002) NSGA II paper by Kalyanmoy Deb. 182. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6:182–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Deb K, Agrawal RB (1994) Simulated binary crossover for continuous search space. Complex Syst 9:1–34

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Deb K, Jain H (2014) An evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm using reference-point-based nondominated sorting approach, part I: solving problems with box constraints. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 18:577–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Deb K, Thiele L, Laumanns M, Zitzler E (2005) Scalable test problems for evolutionary multiobjective optimization. Evol Multiobjective Optim:105–145

  9. Donoso Y, Fabregat R (2007) Multi-objective optimization in computer networks using metaheuristics. Auerbach Publications

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Dutta S, Das KN (2019) A survey on pareto-based EAS to solve multi-objective optimization problems. Springer Singapore, in soft computing for problem solving 807-820.

  11. Elarbi M, Bechikh S, Ben Said L, Datta R (2017) Multi-objective optimization: classical and evolutionary approaches. Adapt Learn Optim 20:1–30

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Elarbi M, Bechikh S, Coello CAC (2019) Approximating complex Pareto fronts with predefined Normal-boundary intersection directions. IEEE trans Evol Comput 1–11.

  13. Ishibuchi H, Doi K, Masuda H, Nojima Y (2015) Relation between weight vectors and solutions in MOEA/D. proc - 2015 IEEE Symp Ser Comput Intell SSCI 2015 861–868.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jain H, Deb K (2014) An evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm using reference-point based nondominated sorting approach, part II: handling constraints and extending to an adaptive approach. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 18:602–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kamila NK, Jena L, Bhuyan HK (2016) Pareto-based multi-objective optimization for classification in data mining. Clust Comput 19:1723–1745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lezcano C, Vázquez Noguera JL, Pinto-Roa DP, García-Torres M, Gaona C, Gardel-Sotomayor PE (2020) A multi-objective approach for designing optimized operation sequence on binary image processing. Heliyon 6:e03670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Li K, Deb K, Zhang Q, Kwong S (2015) An evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm based on dominance and decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 19:694–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Liagkouras K, Metaxiotis K (2013) An elitist polynomial mutation operator for improved performance of MOEAs in computer networks. Proc - Int Conf Comput Commun Networks, ICCCN

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu Q, Jin Y, Heiderich M, Rodemann T (2019) Adaptation of reference vectors for evolutionary many-objective optimization of problems with irregular Pareto fronts. 2019 IEEE Congr Evol Comput CEC 2019 - proc 978:1726–1733.

  21. Nakib A, Oulhadj H, Siarry P (2008) Non-supervised image segmentation based on multiobjective optimization. Pattern Recogn Lett 29:161–172

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Nakib A, Oulhadj H, Siarry P (2010) Image thresholding based on Pareto multiobjective optimization. Eng Appl Artif Intell 23:313–320

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Pamulapati T, Mallipeddi R, Suganthan PN (2019) ISDE +an Indicator for multi and many-objective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 23:346–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Qingfu Z, Hui L (2007) MOEA/D: a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 11:712–731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sato H (2014) Inverted PBI in MOEA/D and its impact on the search performance on multi and many-objective optimization. GECCO 2014 - proc 2014 genet Evol Comput Conf 645–652.

  26. Shang K, Ishibuchi H, He L, Pang LM (2021) A survey on the Hypervolume Indicator in evolutionary multiobjective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 25:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  28. While L, Hingston P, Barone L, Huband S (2006) A faster algorithm for calculating hypervolume. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 10:29–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yuan Y, Xu H, Wang B, Yao X (2016) A new dominance relation-based evolutionary algorithm for many-objective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 20:16–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhang X, Tian Y, Jin Y (2015) A knee point-driven evolutionary algorithm for many-objective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 19:761–776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhou Y, Xiang Y, Chen Z, He J, Wang J (2019) A scalar projection and angle-based evolutionary algorithm for many-objective optimization problems. IEEE Trans Cybern 49:2073–2084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Zitzler E, Künzli S (2004) Indicator-based selection in multiobjective search. Lect Notes Comput Sci (including Subser Lect Notes Artif Intell Lect Notes Bioinformatics) 3242:832–842

    Google Scholar 

  33. Zitzler E, Thiele L (1998) Multiobjective optimization using evolutionary algorithms - A comparative case study. Lect Notes Comput Sci (including Subser Lect Notes Artif Intell Lect Notes Bioinformatics) 1498 LNCS:292–301.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Technology Silchar, Silchar, India

    Kedar Nath Das, Saykat Dutta, M. Sri Srinivasa Raju & Pradip Deb Roy

Authors
  1. Kedar Nath Das
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Saykat Dutta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Sri Srinivasa Raju
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pradip Deb Roy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saykat Dutta.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Das, K.N., Dutta, S., Raju, M.S.S. et al. A robust environmental selection strategy in decomposition based many-objective optimization. Multimed Tools Appl 82, 7971–7989 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-022-12974-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-022-12974-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation