Abstract
Cardinality constrained optimization problems (CCOPs) are fixed-size subset selection problems with applications in several fields. CCOPs comprising multiple scenarios, such as cardinality values that form an interval, can be defined as multi-scenario CCOPs (MSCCOPs). An MSCCOP is expected to optimize the objective value of each cardinality to support decision-making processes. When the computation is conducted using traditional optimization algorithms, an MSCCOP often requires several passes (algorithmic runs) to obtain all the (near-)optima, where each pass handles a specific cardinality. Such separate passes abandon most of the knowledge (including the potential superior solution structures) learned in one pass that can also be used to improve the results of other passes. By considering this situation, we propose a generic transformation strategy that can be referred to as the Mucard strategy, which converts an MSCCOP into a low-dimensional multi-objective optimization problem (MOP) to simultaneously obtain all the (near-)optima of the MSCCOP in a single algorithmic run. In essence, the Mucard strategy combines separate passes that deal with distinct variable spaces into a single pass, enabling knowledge reuse and knowledge interchange of each cardinality among genetic individuals. The performance of the Mucard strategy was demonstrated using two typical MSCCOPs. For a given number of evolved individuals, the Mucard strategy improved the accuracy of the obtained solutions because of the in-process knowledge than that obtained by untransformed evolutionary algorithms, while reducing the average runtime. Furthermore, the equivalence between the optimal solutions of the transformed MOP and the untransformed MSCCOP can be theoretically proved.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
References
- 1
Stephan R. Cardinality constrained combinatorial optimization: complexity and polyhedra. Discrete Optim, 2010, 7: 99–113
- 2
Karp R M. Reducibility among combinatorial problems. In: Proceedings of Complexity of Computer Computations, 1972. 85–103
- 3
Banfield R E, Hall L O, Bowyer K W, et al. Ensemble diversity measures and their application to thinning. Inf Fusion, 2005, 6: 49–62
- 4
Moghaddam B, Weiss Y, Avidan S. Spectral bounds for sparse pca: exact and greedy algorithms. In: Proceedings of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2005. 915–922
- 5
Bruckstein A M, Donoho D L, Elad M. From sparse solutions of systems of equations to sparse modeling of signals and images. SIAM Rev, 2009, 51: 34–81
- 6
Zhou X, Huaimin W, Bo D. How many robots are enough: a multi-objective genetic algorithm for the single-objective time-limited complete coverage problem. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2018. 2380–2387
- 7
Chai R, Li H P, Meng F Y, et al. Energy consumption optimization-based joint route selection and flow allocation algorithm for software-defined networking. Sci China Inf Sci, 2017, 60: 040306
- 8
Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, et al. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput, 2002, 6: 182–197
- 9
Wang R, Purshouse R C, Fleming P J. Preference-inspired coevolutionary algorithms for many-objective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput, 2013, 17: 474–494
- 10
Wang R, Zhou Z B, Ishibuchi H, et al. Localized weighted sum method for many-objective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput, 2018, 22: 3–18
- 11
Wang Y, Li H X, Yen G G, et al. MOMMOP: multiobjective optimization for locating multiple optimal solutions of multimodal optimization problems. IEEE Trans Cybern, 2015, 45: 830–843
- 12
Gupta A, Ong Y S, Feng L. Multifactorial evolution: toward evolutionary multitasking. IEEE Trans Evol Comput, 2016, 20: 343–357
- 13
Gupta A, Ong Y S, Feng L, et al. Multiobjective multifactorial optimization in evolutionary multitasking. IEEE Trans Cybern, 2017, 47: 1652–1665
- 14
Knowles J D, Watson R A, Corne D W. Reducing local optima in single-objective problems by multi-objectivization. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization, 2001. 269–283
- 15
Song W, Wang Y, Li H X, et al. Locating multiple optimal solutions of nonlinear equation systems based on multiob-jective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput, 2015, 19: 414–431
- 16
Bienstock D. Computational study of a family of mixed-integer quadratic programming problems. Math Program, 1996, 74: 121–140
- 17
Burdakov O, Kanzow C, Schwartz A. On a reformulation of mathematical programs with cardinality constraints. In: Proceedings of Advances in Global Optimization, 2015. 3–14
- 18
Sun X L, Zheng X J, Li D. Recent advances in mathematical programming with semi-continuous variables and cardinality constraint. J Oper Res Soc China, 2013, 1: 55–77
- 19
Rifki O, Ono H. A survey of computational approaches to portfolio optimization by genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference Computing in Economics and Finance, 2012
- 20
Ruiz-Torrubiano R, García-Moratilla S, Suárez A. Optimization problems with cardinality constraints. In: Proceedings of Computational Intelligence in Optimization, 2010. 105–130
- 21
Chang T J, Meade N, Beasley J E, et al. Heuristics for cardinality constrained portfolio optimisation. Comput Oper Res, 2000, 27: 1271–1302
- 22
Volgenant A. Solving the k-cardinality assignment problem by transformation. Eur J Oper Res, 2004, 157: 322–331
- 23
Radcliffe N J, George F A. A study in set recombination. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, 1993. 23–30
- 24
Kariv O, Hakimi S L. An algorithmic approach to network location problems. SIAM J Appl Math, 1979, 37: 539–560
- 25
Reese J. Solution methods for the p-median problem: an annotated bibliography. Networks, 2006, 48: 125–142
- 26
Mladenović N, Brimberg J, Hansen P, et al. The p-median problem: a survey of metaheuristic approaches. Eur J Oper Res, 2007, 179: 927–939
- 27
ReVelle C S, Eiselt H A, Daskin M S. A bibliography for some fundamental problem categories in discrete location science. Eur J Oper Res, 2008, 184: 817–848
- 28
Hosage C M, Goodchild M F. Discrete space location-allocation solutions from genetic algorithms. Ann Oper Res, 1986, 6: 35–46
- 29
Alp O, Erkut E, Drezner Z. An efficient genetic algorithm for the p-median problem. Ann Oper Res, 2003, 122: 21–42
- 30
Li X, Xiao N C, Claramunt C, et al. Initialization strategies to enhancing the performance of genetic algorithms for the p-median problem. Comput Ind Eng, 2011, 61: 1024–1034
- 31
Lim A, Xu Z. A fixed-length subset genetic algorithm for the p-median problem. In: Proceedings of Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, 2003. 1596–1597
- 32
Correa E S, Steiner M T A, Freitas A A, et al. A genetic algorithm for solving a capacitated p-median problem. Numer Algorithm, 2004, 35: 373–388
- 33
Alba E, Domínguez E. Comparative analysis of modern optimization tools for the p-median problem. Stat Comput, 2006, 16: 251–260
- 34
Hansen P, Mladenoviíc N. Complement to a comparative analysis of heuristics for the p-median problem. Stat Comput, 2008, 18: 41–46
- 35
Daskin M S, Maass K L. The p-median problem. In: Location Science. Berlin: Springer, 2015. 21–45
- 36
Daskin M S. Network and Discrete Location: Models, Algorithms, and Applications. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2013
- 37
Galvão R D, ReVelle C. A Lagrangean heuristic for the maximal covering location problem. Eur J Oper Res, 1996, 88: 114–123
- 38
Körkel M. On the exact solution of large-scale simple plant location problems. Eur J Oper Res, 1989, 39: 157–173
- 39
Cesarone F, Scozzari A, Tardella F. Efficient algorithms for mean-variance portfolio optimization with hard real-world constraints. In: Proceedings of the 18th AFIR Colloquium: Financial Risk in a Changing World, 2008
- 40
Ponsich A, Jaimes A L, Coello C A C. A survey on multiobjective evolutionary algorithms for the solution of the portfolio optimization problem and other finance and economics applications. IEEE Trans Evol Comput, 2013, 17: 321–344
- 41
Metaxiotis K, Liagkouras K. Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms for portfolio management: a comprehensive literature review. Expert Syst Appl, 2012, 39: 11685–11698
- 42
Markowitz H. Portfolio selection. J Financ, 1952, 7: 77–91
- 43
Fieldsend J E, Matatko J, Peng M. Cardinality constrained portfolio optimisation. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligent Data Engineering and Automated Learning, 2004. 788–793
- 44
Anagnostopoulos K P, Mamanis G. A portfolio optimization model with three objectives and discrete variables. Comput Oper Res, 2010, 37: 1285–1297
- 45
Ruiz-Torrubiano R, Suarez A. Hybrid approaches and dimensionality reduction for portfolio selection with cardinality constraints. IEEE Comput Intell Mag, 2010, 5: 92–107
- 46
Cesarone F, Scozzari A, Tardella F. A new method for mean-variance portfolio optimization with cardinality constraints. Ann Oper Res, 2013, 205: 213–234
- 47
Zitzler E, Thiele L, Laumanns M, et al. Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review. IEEE Trans Evol Comput, 2003, 7: 117–132
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 61751208, 61502510, 61773390), Outstanding Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province (Grant No. 2017JJ1001), and Special Program for the Applied Basic Research of National University of Defense Technology (Grant No. ZDYYJCYJ20140601).
Author information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhou, X., Wang, H., Peng, W. et al. Solving multi-scenario cardinality constrained optimization problems via multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 62, 192104 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-018-9720-6
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Keywords
- evolutionary computation
- multi-objective optimization
- cardinality-constrained optimization problem
- multiple scenarios
- transformation
- p-median problem
- portfolio optimization problem