A Survey of Decomposition Methods for Multi-objective Optimization

  • Alejandro Santiago
  • Héctor Joaquín Fraire Huacuja
  • Bernabé Dorronsoro
  • Johnatan E. Pecero
  • Claudia Gómez Santillan
  • Juan Javier González  Barbosa
  • José Carlos Soto Monterrubio
Chapter

Abstract

The multi-objective optimization methods are traditionally based on Pareto dominance or relaxed forms of dominance in order to achieve a representation of the Pareto front. However, the performance of traditional optimization methods decreases for those problems with more than three objectives to optimize. The decomposition of a multi-objective problem is an approach that transforms a multi-objective problem into many single-objective optimization problems, avoiding the need of any dominance form. This chapter provides a short review of the general framework, current research trends and future research topics on decomposition methods.

References

  1. 1.
    Dantzig, G.B., Wolfe, P.: Decomposition principle for linear programs. Oper. Res. 8(1), 101–111 (1960)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dantzig, G.B., Harvey, R.P., Lansdowne, Zachary F., Robinson, D.W., Maier, S.F.: Formulating and solving the network design problem by decomposition. Transp. Res. Part B: Methodol. 13(1), 5–17 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, J., James, B.B., Dovi, A.R.: Structural optimization by multi level decomposition. AIAA J. 23(11), 1775–1782 (1985)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ovacik, I.M., Uzsoy, R.: Decomposition Methods for Complex Factory Scheduling Problems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dorronsoro, B., Danoy, G., Nebro, A.J., Bouvry, P.: Achieving super-linear performance in parallel multi-objective evolutionary algorithms by means of cooperative coevolution. Comput. Oper. Res. 40(6), 1552–1563(2013) (Emergent nature inspired algorithms for multi-objective optimization)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu, M., Zou, X., Chen, Y., Wu, Z.: Performance assessment of DMOEA-DD with CEC 2009 MOEA competition test instances. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 09), pp. 2913–2918 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boyd, S., Xiao, L., Mutapcic, A., Mattingley, J.: Notes on decomposition methods. Notes for EE364B, Stanford University (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Abdelouahed, H., Mishra, S.K.: Decomposition methods based on augmented lagrangians: a survey. In: Mishra, S.K. (ed.) Topics in Nonconvex Optimization, Springer Optimization and Its Applications, pp. 175–203. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koko, J.: A survey on dual decomposition methods. SeMA J. 62(1), 27–59 (2013)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Palomar, D.P., Chiang, Mung: A tutorial on decomposition methods for network utility maximization. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 24(8), 1439–1451 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sakawa, M., Yano, H.: A fuzzy decomposition method by right-hand-side allocation for large-scale multiobjective nonlinear programming problems. In: Clmaco, J. (ed.) Multicriteria Analysis, pp. 237–246. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sefrioui, M., Perlaux, J.: Nash genetic algorithms: examples and applications. In: Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 1, pp. 509–516 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhan, Z.H., Li, J., Cao, J., Zhang, J., Chung, H.S.-H., Shi, Y.-H.: Multiple populations for multiple objectives: a coevolutionary technique for solving multiobjective optimization problems. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 43(2), 445–463 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhang, Q., Li, H.: MOEA/D: a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 11(6), 712–731 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grabisch, M., Marichal, J.-L., Mesiar, R., Pap, E.: Aggregation functions: means. Inf. Sci. 181(1), 1–22 (2011)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zadeh, L.: Optimality and non-scalar-valued performance criteria. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 8(1), 59–60 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marler, R.T., Arora, J.S.: Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct. Multi. Optim. 26(6), 369–395 (2004)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sindhya, K., Ruuska, S., Haanp, T., Miettinen, K.: A new hybrid mutation operator for multiobjective optimization with differential evolution. Soft. Comput. 15(10), 2041–2055 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Athan, T.W., Pa-palambros, P.Y.: A note on weighted criteria methods for compromise solutions in multi-objective optimization. Eng. Optim. 27, 155–176 (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang, Q., Liu, W., Li, H.: The performance of a new version of MOEA/D on CEC09 unconstrained mop test instances. In: IEEE Evolutionary Computation (CEC’09), pp. 203–208 (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Messac, A., Mattson, C.A.: Generating well-distributed sets of Pareto points for engineering design using physical programming. Optim. Eng. 3(4), 431–450 (2002)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tan, Y.Y., Jiao, Y.C., Li, H., Wang, X.: MOEA/D uniform design: a new version of MOEA/D for optimization problems with many objectives. Comput. Oper. Res. 40(6), 1648−1660 (2013) (emergent nature inspired algorithms for multi-objective optimization)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hughes, E.J.: Msops-ii: a general-purpose many-objective optimiser. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2007), pp. 3944–3951 (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hughes, E.J.: Multiple single objective Pareto sampling. In: The 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC’03), vol. 4, pp. 2678–2684 (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hughes, E.J.: Many-objective directed evolutionary line search. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO’11), pp. 761–768. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fabre, M.G., Pulido, G.T., Coello, C.A.C.: Alternative fitness assignment methods for many-objective optimization problems. In: Collet, P., Monmarch, N., Legrand, P., Schoenauer, M., Lutton, E. (eds.): Artificial Evolution. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5975, pp. 146–157. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li, H., Zhang, Q.: Multiobjective optimization problems with complicated pareto sets, MOEA/D and NSGA-II. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 13(2), 229–242 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ishibuchi, H., Murata, T.: A multi-objective genetic local search algorithm and its application to flowshop scheduling. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C Appl. Rev. 28(3), 392–403 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tan, Y.-Y., Jiao, Y.-C., Li, H., Wang, X.-K.: MOEA/D-SQA: a multi-objective memetic algorithm based on decomposition. Eng. Opt. 44(9), 1095–1115 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mei, Y., Tang, K., Yao, X.: Decomposition-based memetic algorithm for multiobjective capacitated arc routing problem. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 15(2), 151–165 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Deb, K., Agrawal, S., Pratap, A., Meyarivan, T.: A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization: Nsga-ii. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1917. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ke, L., Zhang, Q., Battiti, R.: MOEA/D-ACO: a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm using decomposition and ant colony. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 43(6), 1845–1859 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Peng, W., Zhang, Q.: A decomposition-based multi-objective particle swarm optimization algorithm for continuous optimization problems. In: IEEE International Conference on Granular Computing (GrC 2008), pp. 534–537 (2008)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Al Moubayed, N., Petrovski, A., McCall, J.: A novel smart multi-objective particle swarm optimisation using decomposition. In: Schaefer, R., Cotta, C., Koodziej, J., Rudolph, G. (eds.) Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, PPSN XI. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6239, pp. 1–10. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Martínez, S.Z., Coello, C.A.C.: A multi-objective particle swarm optimizer based on decomposition. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO’11), pp. 69–76. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Al Moubayed, N, Petrovski, A., McCall, J.: D2MOPSO: multi-objective particle swarm optimizer based on decomposition and dominance. In: Hao, J.-K., Middendorf, M. (eds.) Evolutionary Computation in Combinatorial Optimization. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7245, pp. 75–86. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Van Veldhuizen, D.A., Lamont, G.B.: Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Research: A History and Analysis (1998)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Coello, C.A.C.: Evolutionary multi-objective optimization: some current research trends and topics that remain to be explored. Front. Comput. Sci. China 3(1), 18–30 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hughes, E.: Evolutionary many-objective optimisation: many once or one many? In: The 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, 2005, vol. 1, pp. 222–227 (2005)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Berkhin, P.: A survey of clustering data mining techniques. In: Kogan, J., Nicholas, C., Teboulle, M. (eds.) Grouping Multi-dimensional Data, pp. 25–71. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Durillo, J.J., Nebro, A.J., Coello, C.A.C., Garcia-Nieto, J., Luna, F., Alba, E.: A study of multi-objective metaheuristics when solving parameter scalable problems. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 14(4), 618–635 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Laumanns, M., Deb, K., Thiele, L., Zitzler, E.: Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization. Theoretical Advances and Applications. Scalable Test Problems for Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization. 105−145 (2005)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Barone, L., Huband, S., Hingston, P., While, L.: A review of multi-objective test problems and a scalable test problem toolkit. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 10(5), 447–506 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alejandro Santiago
    • 1
  • Héctor Joaquín Fraire Huacuja
    • 1
  • Bernabé Dorronsoro
    • 2
  • Johnatan E. Pecero
    • 3
  • Claudia Gómez Santillan
    • 1
  • Juan Javier González  Barbosa
    • 1
  • José Carlos Soto Monterrubio
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto Tecnológico de Ciudad MaderoCiudad MaderoMexico
  2. 2.University of LilleLilleFrance
  3. 3.University of LuxembourgLuxembourgLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations