Advertisement

Solving Multiobjective Optimization Problem by Constraint Optimization

  • He Jiang
  • Shuyan Zhang
  • Zhilei Ren
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6238)

Abstract

Multiobjective optimization problems (MOPs) have attracted intensive efforts from AI community and many multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) were proposed to tackle MOPs. In addition, a few researchers exploited MOEAs to solve constraint optimization problems (COPs). In this paper, we investigate how to tackle a MOP by iteratively solving a series of COPs and propose the algorithm named multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on constraint optimization (MEACO). In contrast to existing MOEAs, MEACO requires no complex selection mechanism or elitism strategy in solving MOPs. Given a MOP, MEACO firstly constructs a new COP by transforming all but one of objective functions into constraints. Then, the optimal solution of this COP is computed by a subroutine evolutionary algorithm so as to determine some Pareto-optimal solutions. After that, a new COP with dramatically reduced search space can be constructed using existing Pareto-optimal solutions. This new generated COP will be further solved to find more Pareto-optimal solutions. This process is repeated until the stopping criterion is met. Experimental results on 9 well-known MOP test problems show that our new algorithm outperforms existing MOEAs in terms of convergence and spacing metrics.

Keywords

Multiobjective Optimization Constraint Optimization Evolutionary Algorithm 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Coello Coello, C.A.: Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization: A Historical View of the Field. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 1(1), 28–36 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schaffer, J.D.: Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms. In: Proc. of the 1st Int’l Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 93–100. L. Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale (1985)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fonseca, C.M., Fleming, P.J.: Genetic Algorithms for Multiobjective Optimization: Formulation, Discussion and Generalization. In: Proc. of the 5th Int’l Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 416–423. Morgan Kauffman, San Mateo (1993)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Srinivas, N., Deb, K.: Multiobjective Optimization Using Nondominated Sorting in Genetic Algorithms. Evolutionary Computation 2(3), 221–248 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Horn, J., Nafpliotis, N., Goldberg, D.E.: A Niched Pareto Genetic Algorithm for Multiobjective Optimization. In: Proc. of the 1st IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 82–87. IEEE, Piscataway (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zitzler, E., Laumanns, M., Thiele, L.: SPEA2: Improving the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm. In: Evolutionary Methods for Design, Optimization and Control with Applications to Industrial Problems, pp. 95–100. Springer, Berlin (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Knowles, J.D., Corne, D.W.: Approximating the Nondominated Front Using the Pareto Archived Evolution Strategy. Evolutionary Computation 8(2), 149–172 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., Meyarivan, T.: A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 6(2), 182–197 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Corne, D.W., Jerram, N.R., Knowles, J.D., Oates, M.J.: PESA-II: Region-Based Selection in Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization. In: Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conf., pp. 283–290. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang, Q.F., Zhou, A.M., Jin, Y.: RM-MEDA: A Regularity Model-Based Multiobjective Estimation of Distribution Algorithm. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 11(1), 41–63 (2007)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gong, M.G., Jiao, L.C., Du, H.F., Bo, L.F.: Multiobjective Immune Algorithm with Nondominated Neighbor-Based Selection. Evolutionary Computation 16(2), 225–255 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aguirre, A.H., Rionda, S.B., Coello Coello, C.A., Lizrraga, G.L., Montes, E.M.: Handling Constraints Using Multiobjective Optimization Concepts. Int’l Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 59(15), 1989–2017 (2004)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Surry, P.D., Radcliffe, N.J.: The COMOGA Method: Constrained Optimization by Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithms. Control and Cybernetics 26(3), 391–412 (1997)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, Y., Cai, Z.X., Guo, G.Q., Zhou, Y.R.: Multiobjective Optimization and Hybrid Evolutionary Algorithm to Solve Constrained Optimization Problems. IEEE Trans. on System, Man And Cybernetics 37(3), 560–575 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Deb, K., Jain, S.: Running Performance Metrics for Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization, Technical Report. Kanpur: Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur. NO. 2002004 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schott, J.R.: Fault Tolerant Design Using Single and Multicriteria Genetic Algorithm Optimization. Masters Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA (1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • He Jiang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shuyan Zhang
    • 1
  • Zhilei Ren
    • 3
  1. 1.School of SoftwareDalian University of Technology
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Vermont
  3. 3.School of Mathematical SciencesDalian University of Technology

Personalised recommendations