Splitting for Multi-objective Optimization
- 57 Downloads
We introduce a new multi-objective optimization (MOO) methodology based the splitting technique for rare-event simulation. The method generalizes the elite set selection of the traditional splitting framework, and uses both local and global sampling to sample in the decision space. In addition, an 𝜖-dominance method is employed to maintain good solutions. The algorithm was compared with state-of-the art MOO algorithms using a prevailing set of benchmark problems. Numerical experiments demonstrate that the new algorithm is competitive with the well-established MOO algorithms and that it can outperform the best of them in various cases.
KeywordsSplitting method Multi-objective optimization Pareto front Pareto set Benchmarking Inverted generational distance
Mathematics Subject Classification (2010)68W20 90C29
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
This work was supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, under grant number CE140100049. Qibin Duan would also like to acknowledge the support from the University of Queensland through the UQ International Scholarships scheme.
- Botev ZI (2009) The generalized splitting method for combinatorial counting and static rare-event probability estimation. PhD thesis, The University of QueenslandGoogle Scholar
- Botev ZI, Kroese DP (2012) Efficient monte carlo simulation via the generalized splitting method. Stat Comput 1(1–16)Google Scholar
- Coello CAC, Lechuga MS (2002) MOPSO A proposal for multiple objective particle swarm optimization Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, vol 2, pp 1051–1056Google Scholar
- Coello CAC, Van Veldhuizen DA, Lamont GB (2002) Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-objective problems, vol 242. SpringerGoogle Scholar
- Fonseca CM, Fleming PJ (1993) Multiobjective genetic algorithms IEE colloquium on genetic algorithms for control systems engineering. IET, pp 6–1Google Scholar
- Knowles J, Corne D (1999) The Pareto archived evolution strategy: A new baseline algorithm for pareto multiobjective optimisation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, vol 1Google Scholar
- Kukkonen S, Lampinen J (2005) GDE3 The third evolution step of generalized differential evolution Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, vol 1, pp 443–450Google Scholar
- Liu H, Li X (2009) The multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on determined weight and sub-regional search Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 1928–1934Google Scholar
- Liu M, Zou X, Chen Y, Wu Z (2009) Performance assessment of DMOEA-DD with CEC 2009 MOEA competition test instances Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, vol 1, pp 2913–2918Google Scholar
- Rubinstein RY, Kroese DP (2017) Simulation and the Monte Carlo method, 3rd edn. WileyGoogle Scholar
- Tseng L, Chen C (2009) Multiple trajectory search for unconstrained/constrained multi-objective optimization Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 1951–1958Google Scholar
- Ünveren A, Acan A (2007) Multi-objective optimization with cross entropy method: Stochastic learning with clustered Pareto fronts Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp 3065–3071Google Scholar
- Zhang Q, Liu W, Li H (2009) The performance of a new version of MOEA/d on cec09 unconstrained MOP test instances Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, vol 1, pp 203–208Google Scholar
- Zhang Q, Zhou A, Zhao S, Suganthan PN, Liu W, Tiwari S (2008) Multiobjective optimization test instances for the CEC, 2009 special session and competition. University of Essex, Colchester, UK and Nanyang technological University, Singapore, special session on performance assessment of multi-objective optimization algorithms, technical report, 264Google Scholar