A Novel Component-Based Model and Ranking Strategy in Constrained Evolutionary Optimization

  • Yu Wu
  • Yuanxiang Li
  • Xing Xu
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5678)

Abstract

This paper presents a component-based model with a novel ranking method (CMR) for constrained evolutionary optimization. In general, many constraint-handling techniques inevitably solve two important problems: (1) how to generate the feasible solutions, (2) how to direct the search to find the optimal feasible solution. For the first problem, this paper introduces a component-based model. The model is useful for exploiting valuable information from infeasible solutions and for transforming infeasible solutions into feasible ones. Furthermore, a new ranking strategy is designed for the second problem. The new algorithm is tested on several well-known benchmark functions, and the empirical results suggest that it continuously found the optimums in 30 runs and has better standard deviations for robustness and stability.

Keywords

component-based model constraint handling rank strategy evolutionary algorithm 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Coello, C.A.C.: Theoretical and numerical constraint handling techniques used with evolutionary algorithms: A survey of the state of the art. J. Computer Methods in Applied Mech. 191(11-12), 1245–1287 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kazarlis, S., Petridis, V.: Varying fitness functions in genetic algorithms: Studying the rate of increase of the dynamic penalty terms. J. Computer Science 1498, 211–220 (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Farmani, R., Wright, J.A.: Self-adaptive fitness formulation for constrained optimization. J. IEEE Trans. Evolutionary Computation 7(5), 445–455 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Runarsson, T.P., Yao, X.: Stochastic ranking for constrained evolutionary optimization. J. IEEE Trans. Evolutionary Computation 4(3), 284–294 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koziel, S., Michalewicz, Z.: Evolutionary algorithms, homomorphous mappings, and constrained parameter optimization. J. Evolutionary Computation 7, 19–44 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhou, Y., Li, Y., He, J., Kang, L.: Multiobjective and MGG evolutionary algorithm for constrained optimization. In: IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation 2003, pp. 1–5. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Venkatraman, S., Yen, G.G.: A generic framework for constrained optimization using genetic algorithms. J. IEEE Trans. Evolutionary Computation 9(4), 424–435 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Runarsson, T.P., Yao, X.: Search biases in constrained evolutionary optimization. J. IEEE Trans. Evolutionary Computation 35(2), 233–243 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rahnamayan, S., Tizhoosh, H.R., Salama, M.M.A.: Opposition-based differential evolution algorithms. In: IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation 2006, pp. 6756–6763. IEEE Press, Canada (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mezura-Montes, E., Coello, C.A.C.: A simple multimembered evolution strategy to solve constrained optimization problems. J. IEEE Trans. Evolutionary Computation 9(1), 1–17 (2005)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Du, T., Fei, P., Shen, Y.: A Modified Niche Genetic Algorithm Based on Evolution Gradient and Its Simulation Analysis. In: Third International Conference on Natural Computation, China, vol. 4, pp. 35–39 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yu Wu
    • 1
  • Yuanxiang Li
    • 1
  • Xing Xu
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Lab. of Software EngineeringWuhan UniversityWuhan

Personalised recommendations