Effective Use of Directional Information in Multi-objective Evolutionary Computation

  • Martin Brown
  • Robert E. Smith
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2723)


While genetically inspired approaches to multi-objective optimization have many advantages over conventional approaches, they do not explicitly exploit directional/gradient information. This paper describes how steepest-descent, multi-objective optimization theory can be combined with EC concepts to produce improved algorithms. It shows how approximate directional information can be efficiently extracted from parent individuals, and how a multi-objective gradient can be calculated, such that children individuals can be placed in appropriate, dominating search directions. The paper describes and introduces the basic theoretical concepts as well as demonstrating some of the concepts on a simple test problem.


Search Direction Pareto Front Descent Direction Directional Cone Evolutionary Computation Algorithm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Brown, M. 3(2002) Steepest Descent Vector Optimization and Product Design, submitted for publication. in preparationGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Coello, Carlos A., Van Veldhuizen, David A., and Lamont, Gary B (2002) Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Deb, K. (2000). Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms. Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Deb, K, Anand, A., and Joshi, D (2002). A Computationally Efficient Evolutionary Algorithm for Real-Parameter Optimization. KanGAL Report No. 2002003. (to appear in the journal Evolutionary Computation).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Fliege, J. (2000) Steepest Descent Methods for Multicriteria Optimization. Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, 51(3), pp. 479–494.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Laumanns, M., Thiele, L., Deb, K., and Zitzler, E. (2002) Combining Convergence and Diversity in Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization. Evolutionary Computation 10(3) pp. 263–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Parmee, I. C., Watson, A., Cvetkovic, D., Bonham, C. (2000). Multi-objective Satisfaction within an Interactive Evolutionary Design Environment. Evolutionary Computation. 8(2). pp 197–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Product Formulation using Intelligent Software, Scholar
  9. [9]
    Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J.; and Haftka, R.T. (1997). Multidisciplinary aerospace design optimization: survey of recent developments. Structural Optimization 14, pp. 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Vicini, A., and Quagliarella, D. (1997) Inverse and direct airfoil design by means of a multi-objective genetic algorithm. AIAA Journal. 35(9).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Brown
    • 1
  • Robert E. Smith
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computing and MathematicsManchester Metropolitan UniversityManchesterUK
  2. 2.The Intelligent Computer Systems CentreThe University of The West of EnglandBristolUK

Personalised recommendations