ICHEA – A Constraint Guided Search for Improving Evolutionary Algorithms

  • Anurag Sharma
  • Dharmendra Sharma
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7663)


Many science and engineering applications require finding solutions to optimization problems by satisfying a set of constraints. These problems are typically NP-complete and can be formalized as constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs). Evolutionary algorithms (EAs) are good solvers for optimization problems ubiquitous in various problem domains. EAs have also been used to solve CSPs, however traditional EAs are ‘blind’ to constraints as they do not exploit information from the constraints in search for solutions. In this paper, a variation of EA is proposed where information is extracted from the constraints and exploited in search. The proposed model (ICHEA for Intelligent Constraint Handling Evolutionary Algorithm) improves on efficiency and is independent of problem characteristics. This paper presents ICHEA and its results from solving continuous CSPs. The results are significantly better than results from other existing approaches and the model shows strong potential. The scope is to finding at least one solution that satisfies all the constraints rather than optimizing the solutions.


constraint satisfaction problem (CSP) Evolutionary algorithms (EAs) Intelligent Constraint Handling Evolutionary Algorithm (ICHEA) optimization problems 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Brailsford, S.: Constraint satisfaction problems: Algorithms and applications. European Journal of Operational Research 119(3), 557–581 (1999)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coello Coello, C.A.: Theoretical and numerical constraint-handling techniques used with evolutionary algorithms: a survey of the state of the art. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 191(11-12), 1245–1287 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Craenen, B.G.W., et al.: Comparing evolutionary algorithms on binary constraint satisfaction problems. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 7(5), 424–444 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Craenen, B.G.W.: Solving constraint satisfaction problems with evolutionary algorithms. Phd Dissertation, Vrije Universiteit (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Craenen, B.G.W., et al.: Solving constraint satisfaction problems with heuristic-based evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 2, pp. 1571–1577. IEEE (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deb, K., et al.: A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 6(2), 182–197 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deb, K.: Kanpur Genetic Algorithms Laboratory,
  8. 8.
    Eiben, A.E.: Evolutionary algorithms and constraint satisfaction: definitions, survey, methodology, and research directions. Presented at the (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fonseca, C.M., Fleming, P.J.: Genetic Algorithms for Multiobjective Optimization: Formu-lation, Discussion and Generalization. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 416–423. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glover, F., Kochenberger, G.A.: Critical event tabu search for multidimensional knapsack problems. In: Osman, I., Kelly, J. (eds.) Meta Heuristics: Theory and Applications (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kramer, O.: A Review of Constraint-Handling Techniques for Evolution Strategies. Applied Computational Intelligence and Soft Computing, 1–11 (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lehman, J., Stanley, K.: Exploiting Open-Endedness to Solve Problems Through the Search for Novelty. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Artificial Life (ALIFE XI). MIT Press (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu, H., et al.: Hybridizing particle swarm optimization with differential evolution for constrained numerical and engineering optimization. Appl. Soft Comput., 629–640 (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mezura-Montes, E., Coello, C.A.C.: A Survey of Constraint-Handling Techniques Based on Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization, Departamento de Computación, Evolutionary Computation Group at CINVESTAV (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Michalewicz, Z., Schoenauer, M.: Evolutionary algorithms for constrained parameter optimization problems. Evolutionary Computation 4(1), 1–32 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Müller, T.: Constraint-based Timetabling. PhD Dissertation, Charles University (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paredis, J.: Co-evolutionary Constraint Satisfaction. In: Davidor, Y., Männer, R., Schwefel, H.-P. (eds.) PPSN 1994. LNCS, vol. 866, pp. 46–55. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schaffer, J.D.: Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 93–100. L. Erl-baum Associates Inc. (1985)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shang, Y., Fromherz, M.P.J.: Experimental complexity analysis of continuous constraint satisfaction problems. Information Sciences 153, 1–36 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sharma, A.: A new optimizing algorithm using reincarnation concept. In: 2010 11th IEEE International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Informatics (CINTI), pp. 281–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Tessema, B., Yen, G.G.: A Self Adaptive Penalty Function Based Algorithm for Constrained Optimization. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, CEC 2006, pp. 246–253. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anurag Sharma
    • 1
  • Dharmendra Sharma
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Information Sciences and EngineeringUniversity of CanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations