skip to main content
10.1145/3319619.3321970acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Modified crowding distance and mutation for multimodal multi-objective optimization

Published:13 July 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Many real-world applications contain complex optimization problems with several conflicting objectives. Finding a solution which can satisfy all the objectives is usually a challenging task for optimization algorithms. When dealing with these complex multi-objective problems, decision-makers want to find the best tradeoff between the conflicting objectives. Another challenge occurs in problems where multiple configurations of the input variables might yield the same objective function values. Such problems are called multimodal problems. For a decision maker, it might be of importance to obtain enough information about all the alternative optimal solutions that reach the same objective value. Traditionally, Evolutionary Algorithms make use selection processes based only on objective function values, which might be a disadvantage when faced with multimodal problems. In this article, we present two operators to use in multimodal multi-objective algorithms, namely a modified crowding distance operator and a neighbourhood Polynomial mutation, which take into account the distribution of solution in the decision space at run-time. Our experimental results demonstrate that the proposed operators are able to outperform the performance of a state-of-the-art method on six current multimodal benchmark functions.

References

  1. Shi Cheng, Hui Lu, Xiujuan Lei, and Yuhui Shi. 2018. A quarter century of particle swarm optimization. Complex & Intelligent Systems 4, 3 (2018), 227--239.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Kalyanmoy Deb, Amrit Pratap, Sameer Agarwal, and TAMT Meyarivan. 2002. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation 6, 2 (2002), 182--197. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Kalyanmoy Deb and Santosh Tiwari. 2005. Omni-optimizer: A procedure for single and multi-objective optimization. In International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization. Springer, Guanajuato, Mexico, 47--61. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Mohammad Hamdan. 2012. The distribution index in polynomial mutation for evolutionary multiobjective optimisation algorithms: An experimental study. In International Conference on Electronics Computer Technology. IEEE, Kanyakumari, India.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Jing Liang, Weiwei Xu, Caitong Yue, Kunjie Yu, Hui Song, Oscar D Crisalle, and Boyang Qu. 2019. Multimodal multiobjective optimization with differential evolution. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 44 (2019), 1028--1059.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Jing Liang, Caitong Yue, and Boyang Qu. 2016. Multimodal multi-objective optimization: a preliminary study. In Evolutionary Computation (CEC). IEEE, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2454--2461.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Ye Tian, Ran Cheng, Xingyi Zhang, and Yaochu Jin. 2017. PlatEMO: A MATLAB platform for evolutionary multi-objective optimization {educational forum}. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 12, 4 (2017), 73--87.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Caitong Yue, Boyang Qu, and Jing Liang. 2018. A multiobjective particle swarm optimizer using ring topology for solving multimodal multiobjective problems. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 22, 5 (2018), 805--817.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Aimin Zhou, Qingfu Zhang, and Yaochu Jin. 2009. Approximating the set of Pareto-optimal solutions in both the decision and objective spaces by an estimation of distribution algorithm. IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation 13, 5 (2009), 1167--1189. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Modified crowding distance and mutation for multimodal multi-objective optimization

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      GECCO '19: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion
      July 2019
      2161 pages
      ISBN:9781450367486
      DOI:10.1145/3319619

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 13 July 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

      Upcoming Conference

      GECCO '24
      Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
      July 14 - 18, 2024
      Melbourne , VIC , Australia

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader