Andries Engelbrecht
ABSTRACT
Studies on standard many-objective optimisation problems have indicated that multi-objective optimisation algorithms struggle to solve optimisation problems with more than three objectives, because many solutions become dominated. Therefore, the Paretodominance relation is no longer efficient in guiding the search to find an optimal Pareto front for many-objective optimisation problems. Recently, a partial dominance approach has been proposed to address the problem experienced with application of the dominance relation on many objectives. Preliminary results have illustrated that this partial dominance relation has promise, and scales well with an increase in the number of objectives. This paper conducts a more extensive empirical analysis of the partial dominance relation on a larger benchmark of difficult many-objective optimisation problems, in comparison to state-of-the-art algorithms. The results further illustrate that partial dominance is an efficient approach to solve many-objective optimisation problems.
- H. Aquirre and K. Tanaka. 2007. Working Principles, Behavior, and Performance of MOEAs on MNK-Landscapes. European Journal of Operational Research 181, 3 (2007), 1670--1690.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- D. Brockhoff, T. Wagner, and H. Trautmann. 2012. On the properties of the R2 indicator. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference.Google Scholar
- Ran Cheng et al. 2016. A reference vector guided evolutionary algorithm for many-objective optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 20, 5 (October 2016), 773--791.Google Scholar
- K. Deb, S. Agarwal, A. Pratap, and T. Meyarivan. 2000. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. Technical Report 200001. Kanpur, India.Google Scholar
- K. Deb and R.B. Agrawal. 1995. Simulated binary crossover for continuous search space. Complex Systems 9 (1995), 115--148.Google Scholar
- K. Deb and D. Saxena. 2006. Searching for Pareto-optimal solutions through dimensionality reduction for certain large-dimensional multi-objective optimization problems. In In Proceedings of World Congress on Computational Intelligence. 3352--3360.Google Scholar
- Z. Fan, K. Hu, and H. Yin. 2015. Decomposing a multiobjective optimization problem into a number of reduced-dimension multiobjective subproblems using tomographic scanning. In Proceedings of the International Conference on industrial Informatics-Computing Technology, Intelligent Technology, Industrial Information Integration. 71--75.Google Scholar
- R.H. Gómez and C.A.C. Coello Coello. 2013. MOMBI: A new metaheuristic for many-objective optimization based on the R2 indicator. In Proceedings of IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. Cancú, Mexico, 2488--2495.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Helbig and A.P. Engelbrecht. 2020. Partial Dominance for Many-Objective Optimization. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Intelligent Systems, Metaheuristics & Swarm Intelligence. Under review.Google Scholar
- H. Li, K. Deb, Q. Zhang, and P. Suganthan. 2017. Challenging novel many and multi-objective bound constrained benchmark problems. Technical Report.Google Scholar
- M. Sierra and C. Coello Coello. 2005. Improving PSO-Based Multi-objective Optimization Using Crowding, Mutation and &epsis;-Dominance. In Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization, Carlos Coello Coello, Arturo HernÃąndez Aguirre, and Eckart Zitzler (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3410. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 505--519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-31880-4_35Google Scholar
- D.A. van Veldhuizen and G.B. Lamont. 1998. Multiobjective evolutionary algorithm research: a history and analysis. Technical Report TR- 98--03. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Air force Institution of Technology.Google Scholar
- Fangqing Gu Yiu-ming Cheung and Hai-Lin Liu. 2016. A reference vector guided evolutionary algorithm for many-objective optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 20, 5 (October 2016), 755--772.Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. Zitzler and S. Künzli. 2004. Indicator-Based Selection in Multiobjective Search. In Proceedings of International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature - PPSN VIII, Xin Yao, Edmund K. Burke, José A. Lozano, Jim Smith, Juan Julián Merelo-Guervós, John A. Bullinaria, Jonathan E. Rowe, Peter Tiňo, Ata Kabán, and Hans-Paul Schwefel (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Birmingham, UK, 832--842.Google Scholar
- E. Zitzler, M. Laumanns, and L. Thiele. 2001. SPEA2: Improving the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm. TIK Report 103. Computer Engineering and Networks Laboratory (TIK), ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Empirical Analysis of A Partial Dominance Approach to Many-Objective Optimisation
Recommendations
Partial Dominance for Many-Objective Optimization
ISMSI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 4th International Conference on Intelligent Systems, Metaheuristics & Swarm IntelligenceMany optimisation problems have more than three objectives, referred to as many-objective optimisation problems (MaOPs). As the number of objectives increases, the number of solutions that are non-dominated with regards to one another also increases. ...
An r-dominance-based preference multi-objective optimization for many-objective optimization
Evolutionary multi-objective optimization (EMO) algorithms have been used in finding a representative set of Pareto-optimal solutions in the past decade and beyond. However, most of Pareto domination-based multi-objective optimization evolutionary ...
Many-objective optimisation-based optimal drone deployment for agricultural zone
Monitoring using drones is not just a civilian and military task, but it also concerns the agricultural sector, where it can play an important role in the context of smart agriculture. It seems to be a very valuable tool in the future. However, the ...
Comments