Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Implementation of polynomial multi-objective optimization in Mathematica

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We describe implementation of main methods for solving polynomial multi-objective optimization problems by means of symbolic processing available in the programming language MATHEMATICA. Symbolic transformations of unevaluated expressions, representing objective functions and constraints, into the corresponding representation of the single-objective constrained problem are especially emphasized. We also describe a function for the verification of Pareto optimality conditions and a function for graphical illustration of Pareto optimal points and given constraint set.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Benson HP (1978) Existence of efficient solution for vector maximization problems. J Optim Theory Appl 28:569–580

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bhatti MA (2000) Practical optimization methods with Mathematica® applications. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Carmichael DG (1980) Computation of Pareto optima in structural design. Int J Numer Methods Eng 15:925–952

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chankong V, Haimes Y (1983) Multiobjective decision making: theory and methodology series, vol 8. North-Holland, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW (1961) Management models and industrial applications of linear programming. New York: Wiley

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW (1977) Goal programming and multiple objective optimization; part 1. Eur J Oper Res 1:39–54

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Das I, Dennis JE (1997) A closer look at drawbacks of minimizing weighted sums of objectives for Pareto set generation in multicriteria optimization problems. Struct Optim 14:63–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon LC, Price RC (1989) Truncated Newton method for sparse unconstrained optimization using automatic differentiation. J Optimiz Theory Appl 60:261–275

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Haimes YY, Lasdon LS, Wismer DA (1971) On a bicriterion formulation of the problems of integrated system identification and system optimization. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC-1:296–297

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs BF (1980) A comparison of weighting methods in power plant siting. Decis Sci 11:725–737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making methods and applications: a state-of-the-art survey. In: Beckmann M, Kunzi HP (eds) Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems, No. 186. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang CL, Md. Masud AS, in collaboration with Paidy SR, Yoon K (1979) Multiple objective decision making, methods and applications: a state-of-the-art survey. In: Beckmann M, Kunzi HP (eds) Lecture Notes in economics and mathematical systems, No. 164. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Ijiri Y (1965) Management goals and accounting for control. North-Holland, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Ignizio JP (1982) Linear programming in single-multiple-objective systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Mac-Crimmon KR (1973) An overview of multiple objective decision making. In: Cochrane JL, Zeleny M (eds) Multiple criteria decision making, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia

    Google Scholar 

  • Maeder RE (1996) Programming in Mathematica, 3rd edn. Adisson-Wesley, Redwood City, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Maeder RE (2000) Computer science with Mathematica. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Marler RT (2004) Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct Multidisc Optim 26:369–395

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Miettien K (1999) Nonlinear multiobjective optimization. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumaier A (2007) Matlab line search routines. http://solon.cma.univie.ac.at/%7Eneum/software/ls

  • Osyczka A (1984) Multicriterion optimization in engineering with Fortran Programs. New York: Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Schittkowski K (2004) Multicriteria optimization—user’s guide. http://www.klaus-schittkowski.de, November

  • Stadler W (1988) Fundamentals of multicriteria optimization. In: Stadler W (ed) Multicriteria optimization in engineering and in the sciences. Plenum, New York, pp 125

    Google Scholar 

  • Voogd H (1983) Multicriteria evaluation for urban and regional planning. Pion, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltz FM (1967) An engineering approach: hierarchical optimization criteria. IEEE Trans Autom Control AC-12:179–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendell RE, Lee DN (1977) Efficiency in multiple objective optimization problems. Math Program 12:406–414

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfram S (1999) The Mathematica book, 4th edn. Wolfram Media

  • Zadeh LA (1963) Optimality and non-scalar-valued performance criteria. IEEE Trans Autom Control AC-8:59–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou JL, Tits AL, Lawrence CT (1997a) User’s guide for CFSQP version 3.7: a FORTRAN code for solving constrained nonlinear optimization problems, generating iterates satisfying all inequality and linear constraints. Technical Report

  • Zhou JL, Tits AL, Lawrence CT (1997b) User’s guide for CFSQP version 3.7: a C code for solving (large scale) constrained nonlinear optimization problems, generating iterates satisfying all inequality and linear constraints. Technical Report

  • Zionts S (1988) Multiple criteria mathematical programming: an updated overview and several approaches. In: Mitra G (ed) Mathematical models for decision support. Springer, Berlin, pp 135–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Zotos K (2006) Performance comparison of maple and mathematica. Appl Math Comput. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2006.11.008.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Science, Department of Mathematics, University of Niš, Višegradska 33, 18000, Niš, Serbia

    Predrag Stanimirović & Ivan Stanimirović

Authors
  1. Predrag Stanimirović
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ivan Stanimirović
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Predrag Stanimirović.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stanimirović, P., Stanimirović, I. Implementation of polynomial multi-objective optimization in Mathematica. Struct Multidisc Optim 36, 411–428 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-007-0180-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-007-0180-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation