Advertisement

Efficient Sampling When Searching for Robust Solutions

  • Juergen BrankeEmail author
  • Xin Fei
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9921)

Abstract

In the presence of noise on the decision variables, it is often desirable to find robust solutions, i.e., solutions with a good expected fitness over the distribution of possible disturbances. Sampling is commonly used to estimate the expected fitness of a solution; however, this option can be computationally expensive. Researchers have therefore suggested to take into account information from previously evaluated solutions. In this paper, we assume that each solution is evaluated once, and that the information about all previously evaluated solutions is stored in a memory that can be used to estimate a solution’s expected fitness. Then, we propose a new approach that determines which solution should be evaluated to best complement the information from the memory, and assigns weights to estimate the expected fitness of a solution from the memory. The proposed method is based on the Wasserstein distance, a probability distance metric that measures the difference between a sample distribution and a desired target distribution. Finally, an empirical comparison of our proposed method with other sampling methods from the literature is presented to demonstrate the efficacy of our method.

Keywords

Fitness Evaluation Robust Solution Latin Hypercube Sampling Final Solution Selection Small Approximation Error 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Beyer, H.-G., Sendhoff, B.: Evolution strategies for robust optimization. In: World Congress on Computational Intelligence, pp. 4489–4496. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beyer, H.-G., Sendhoff, B.: Robust optimization - a comprehensive survey. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 196(33), 3190–3218 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Branke, J.: Creating robust solutions by means of evolutionary algorithms. In: Eiben, A.E., Bäck, T., Schoenauer, M., Schwefel, H.-P. (eds.) PPSN 1998. LNCS, vol. 1498, pp. 119–128. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Branke, J.: Evolutionary Optimization in Dyamic Environments. Kluwer, Boston (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Branke, J.: Reducing the sampling variance when searching for robust solutions. In: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pp. 235–242. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dudley, R.M.: Real Analysis and Probability, vol. 74. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hansen, N., Ostermeier, A.: Completely derandomized self-adaptation in evolution strategies. Evol. Comput. 9(2), 159–195 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jin, Y., Branke, J.: Evolutionary optimization in uncertain environments - a survey. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 9(3), 303–317 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kruisselbrink, J., Emmerich, M., Bäck, T.: An archive maintenance scheme for finding robust solutions. In: Schaefer, R., Cotta, C., Kołodziej, J., Rudolph, G. (eds.) PPSN XI. LNCS, vol. 6238, pp. 214–223. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Paenke, I., Branke, J., Jin, Y.: Efficient search for robust solutions by means of evolutionary algorithms and fitness approximation. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 10(4), 405–420 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tsutsui, S., Ghosh, A.: Genetic algorithms with a robust solution searching scheme. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 1(3), 201–208 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Warwick Business SchoolUniversity of WarwickCoventryUK

Personalised recommendations