Soft Computing

, Volume 22, Issue 12, pp 3919–3935 | Cite as

A novel constraint-handling technique based on dynamic weights for constrained optimization problems

  • Chaoda Peng
  • Hai-Lin LiuEmail author
  • Fangqing Gu
Methodologies and Application


Bi-objective constraint-handling technique may be one of the most promising constraint techniques for constrained optimization problems. It regards the constraints as an extra objective and using Pareto ranking as selection operator. These algorithms achieve a good convergence by utilizing potential infeasible individuals, but not be good at maintaining the diversity of the population. It is significant to balance the diversity of the population and the convergence of the algorithm. This paper proposes a novel constraint-handling technique based on biased dynamic weights for constrained evolutionary algorithm. The biased weights are used to select different individuals with low objective values and low degree of constraint violations. Furthermore, along with the evolution, more emphasis is placed on the individuals with lower objective values and lower degree of constraint violations by adjusting the biased weights dynamically, which forces the search to a promising feasible region. Thus, the proposed algorithm can keep a good balance between the convergence and the diversity of the population. Moreover, we compared the proposed algorithm with other state-of-the-art algorithms on 42 benchmark problems. The experimental results showed the reliability and stabilization of the proposed algorithm.


Constraint-handling technique Evolutionary algorithm Tchebycheff approach Constrained optimization 



This work was supported in part by the Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61673121, in part by the Projects of Science and Technology of Guangzhou under Grant 201508010008.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and manuscript is approved by all authors for publication.


  1. Asafuddoula M, Ray T, Sarker R (2014) An adaptive hybrid differential evolution algorithm for single objective optimization. Appl Math Comput 231:601–618MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Brest J, Boškovič B, Žumer V (2010) An improved self-adaptive differential evolution algorithm in single objective constrained real-parameter optimization. In: Evolutionary computation, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  3. Cai X, Hu Z, Fan Z (2013) A novel memetic algorithm based on invasive weed optimization and differential evolution for constrained optimization. Soft Comput 17(10):1893–1910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coello CAC (2002) Theoretical and numerical constraint-handling techniques used with evolutionary algorithms: a survey of the state of the art. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191(11):1245–1287MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Datta R, Deb K (2012) An adaptive normalization based constrained handling methodology with hybrid bi-objective and penalty function approach. In: 2012 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation. IEEE, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  6. Deb K (2000) An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithms. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 186(2):311–338CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Deb K, Datta R (2013) A bi-objective constrained optimization algorithm using a hybrid evolutionary and penalty function approach. Eng Optim 45(5):503–527MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Demšar J (2006) Statistical comparisons of classifiers over multiple data sets. J Mach Learn Res 7:1–30Google Scholar
  9. Dong N, Wang Y (2014) An unbiased bi-objective optimization model and algorithm for constrained optimization. Int J Pattern Recognit Artif Intell 28(08):1459008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elsayed SM, Sarker RA, Essam DL (2013) An improved self-adaptive differential evolution algorithm for optimization problems. IEEE Trans Ind Inform 9(1):89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gu F, Hl Liu, Tan KC (2012) A multiobjective evolutionary algorithm using dynamic weight design method. Int J Innov Comput Inf Control 8(5B):3677–3688Google Scholar
  12. Hinterding R, Michalewicz Z (1998) Your brains and my beauty: parent matching for constrained optimisation. In: Evolutionary computation proceedings, the 1998 IEEE international conference on computational intelligence. IEEE, pp 810–815Google Scholar
  13. Ho PY, Shimizu K (2007) Evolutionary constrained optimization using an addition of ranking method and a percentage-based tolerance value adjustment scheme. Inf Sci 177(14):2985–3004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jia G, Wang Y, Cai Z, Jin Y (2013) An improved (\(\mu \)+ \(\lambda \))-constrained differential evolution for constrained optimization. Inf Sci 222:302–322MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Jiao L, Li L, Shang R, Liu F, Stolkin R (2013) A novel selection evolutionary strategy for constrained optimization. Inf Sci 239:122–141MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Joines J, Houck CR et al (1994) On the use of non-stationary penalty functions to solve nonlinear constrained optimization problems with gas. In: Proceedings of the first IEEE conference on evolutionary computation, 1994. IEEE world congress on computational intelligence. IEEE, pp 579–584Google Scholar
  17. Kukkonen S, Lampinen J (2006) Constrained real-parameter optimization with generalized differential evolution. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 207–214Google Scholar
  18. Li X, Zhang G (2014) Biased multiobjective optimization for constrained single-objective evolutionary optimization. In: 2014 11th World congress on intelligent control and automation (WCICA). IEEE, pp 891–896Google Scholar
  19. Li Z, Liang JJ, He X, Shang Z (2010) Differential evolution with dynamic constraint-handling mechanism. In: Evolutionary computation, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  20. Liang J, Runarsson TP, Mezura-Montes E, Clerc M, Suganthan P, Coello CC, Deb K (2006) Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the cec 2006 special session on constrained real-parameter optimization. J Appl Mech 41:8Google Scholar
  21. Lin CY, Wu WH (2004) Self-organizing adaptive penalty strategy in constrained genetic search. Struct Multidiscip Optim 26(6):417–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu HL, Gu F, Zhang Q (2014) Decomposition of a multiobjective optimization problem into a number of simple multiobjective subproblems. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 18(3):450–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu J, Teo K, Wang X, Wu C (2015) An exact penalty function-based differential search algorithm for constrained global optimization. Soft Comput 20(4):1305–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mallipeddi R, Suganthan PN (2010) Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2010 competition on constrained real-parameter optimization. Nanyang Technological UniversityGoogle Scholar
  25. Mezura-Montes E, Coello CAC (2005) A simple multimembered evolution strategy to solve constrained optimization problems. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 9(1):1–17CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Mezura-Montes E, Coello CAC (2006) A survey of constraint-handling techniques based on evolutionary multiobjective optimization. In: Workshop paper at PPSNGoogle Scholar
  27. Michalewicz Z, Attia N (1994) Evolutionary optimization of constrained problems. In: Proceedings of the 3rd annual conference on evolutionary programming, Citeseer, pp 98–108Google Scholar
  28. Mohamed AW, Sabry HZ (2012) Constrained optimization based on modified differential evolution algorithm. Inf Sci 194:171–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Runarsson TP, Yao X (2000) Stochastic ranking for constrained evolutionary optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 4(3):284–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Storn R, Price K (1995) Differential evolution—a simple and efficient adaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Glob Optim 11(4):341–359CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Takahama T, Sakai S (2010) Constrained optimization by the \(\varepsilon \) constrained differential evolution with an archive and gradient-based mutation. In: Evolutionary computation, pp 389–400Google Scholar
  32. Tasgetiren MF, Suganthan P (2006) A multi-populated differential evolution algorithm for solving constrained optimization problem. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC 2006). IEEE, pp 33–40Google Scholar
  33. Tessema B, Yen GG (2009) An adaptive penalty formulation for constrained evolutionary optimization. Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum IEEE Trans Evol Comput 39(3):565–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Venkatraman S, Yen GG (2005) A generic framework for constrained optimization using genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput Evol Comput 9(4):424–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhang Q, Li H (2007) MOEA/D: a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 11(6):712–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhang M, Luo W, Wang X (2008) Differential evolution with dynamic stochastic selection for constrained optimization. Inf Sci 178(15):3043–3074CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Guangdong University of TechnologyGuangdongChina

Personalised recommendations