Pareto Set and EMOA Behavior for Simple Multimodal Multiobjective Functions

  • Mike Preuss
  • Boris Naujoks
  • Günter Rudolph
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4193)

Abstract

Recent research on evolutionary multiobjective optimization has mainly focused on Pareto fronts. However, we state that proper behavior of the utilized algorithms in decision/search space is necessary for obtaining good results if multimodal objective functions are concerned. Therefore, it makes sense to observe the development of Pareto sets as well. We do so on a simple, configurable problem, and detect interesting interactions between induced changes to the Pareto set and the ability of three optimization algorithms to keep track of Pareto fronts.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Deb, K.: Multi-Objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms. Wiley, Chichester (2001)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coello Coello, C.A., Van Veldhuizen, D.A., Lamont, G.B.: Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems. Kluwer, New York (2002)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coello, C.A.C.: Evolutionary multi-objective optimization: a historical view of the field. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 1(1), 28–36 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Neumann, F., Wegener, I.: Minimum spanning trees made easier via multi-objective optimization. In: Beyer, H.G. (ed.) Genetic and evolutionary computation conference (GECCO), pp. 763–769. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Preuss, M., Schönemann, L., Emmerich, M.: Counteracting genetic drift and disruptive recombination in (\(\mu\stackrel{+}{,}\lambda\))-ea on multimodal fitness landscapes. In: Beyer, H.G. (ed.) Genetic and evolutionary computation conference (GECCO), pp. 865–872. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Jong, K.A.: An analysis of the behavior of a class of genetic adaptive systems. PhD thesis, University of Michigan (1975)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ehrgott, M.: Multicriteria Optimization, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Okabe, T., Jin, Y., Olhofer, M., Sendhoff, B.: On Test Functions for Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization. In: Yao, X., Burke, E.K., Lozano, J.A., Smith, J., Merelo-Guervós, J.J., Bullinaria, J.A., Rowe, J.E., Tiňo, P., Kabán, A., Schwefel, H.-P. (eds.) PPSN 2004. LNCS, vol. 3242, pp. 792–802. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhou, A., Zhang, Q., Jin, Y., Tsang, E., Okabe, T.: A model-based evolutionary algorithm for bi-objective optimization. In: Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC), pp. 2568–2575. IEEE Press, Piscataway (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Emmerich, M., Beume, N., Naujoks, B.: An EMO algorithm using the hypervolume measure as selection criterion. In: Coello Coello, C.A., Hernández Aguirre, A., Zitzler, E. (eds.) EMO 2005. LNCS, vol. 3410, pp. 62–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Naujoks, B., Beume, N., Emmerich, M.: Multi-objective optimisation using S-metric selection: Application to three-dimensional solution spaces. In: Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC), pp. 1282–1289. IEEE Press, Piscataway (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beume, N.: Hypervolumen-basierte Selektion in einem evolutionären Algorithmus zur Mehrzieloptimierung. Diploma thesis, University of Dortmund (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mike Preuss
    • 1
  • Boris Naujoks
    • 1
  • Günter Rudolph
    • 1
  1. 1.Lehrstuhl für Algorithm EngineeringUniversität DortmundDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations