Abstract
Multi-objective genetic algorithms allow solving complex problems. They are often used to solve real-world problems. However, close scrutinizes of the execution of these algorithms show that they could suffer from premature convergence or diversity loss problems. This has an impact on the performance results. This paper introduces some tools for genetic algorithms to dynamically adapt their behaviors in order to avoid traps such as local optima. These tools lead to a trade-off between the exploitation and exploration steps. For this end, some quality criteria are introduced to assess solutions over generations. Thereafter, four execution modes are proposed to alternatively ensure diversity preservation and convergence. The results presented in this paper show that the use of these tools improves the overall performance of genetic algorithms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Computing the IGD of the archive is only possible when the optimal solutions are known. Otherwise, the archive is used as a reference front, because it represents the best-known assessment of the optimal Pareto front. Therefore, the instruction If \(IGD(A(t)) = IGD(A(t_d))\) must be replaced by If \(IGD(PF_1(t)) \le IGD(PF_1(t_d))\) in Algorithm 1.
References
Bambha NK, Bhattacharyya SS, Teich J, Zitzler E (2004) Systematic integration of parameterized local search into evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 8(2):137–155
De Jong K (2007) Parameter setting in EAs: a 30 year perspective. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69432-8_1
Deb K (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Wiley-Interscience Series in Systems and Optimization, Wiley, Chichester
Deb K, Agrawal R (1995) Simulated binary crossover for continuous search space. Complex Syst 9(2):115–148. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.26.8485
Deb K, Jain S (2002) Running performance metrics for evolutionary multi-objective optimization. In: Wang L, Tan KC, Furuhashi T, Kim JH, Yao X (eds) Proceedings of the 4th Asia-Pacific conference on simulated evolution and learning (SEAL’02), vol 1. Nanyang Technical University, Orchid Country Club, Singapore, pp 13–20
Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2000) A fast elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6:182–197. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.18.7210
Deb K, Sindhya K, Okabe T (2007) Self-adaptive simulated binary crossover for real-parameter optimization. In: Proceedings of the 9th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation. GECCO ’07, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 1187–1194. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1276958.1277190
Eiben AE, Hinterding R, Michalewicz Z (1999) Parameter control in evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3(2):124–141
Hinterding R, Michalewicz Z, Peachey TC (1996) Self-adaptive genetic algorithm for numeric functions. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on parallel problem solving from nature. PPSN IV, Springer-Verlag, London, pp 420–429. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=645823.670545
Hippolyte JL, Bloch C, Chatonnay P, Espanet C, Chamagne D (2007) A self-adaptive multiagent evolutionary algorithm for electrical machine design. In: Thierens D et al (eds) GECCO’07, 9th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, vol 2. ACM Press, New York, pp 1250–1255
Koumousis VK, Katsaras CP (2006) A saw-tooth genetic algorithm combining the effects of variable population size and reinitialization to enhance performance. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 10(1):19–28
Tan KC, Chiam SC, Mamun AA, Goh CK (2009) Balancing exploration and exploitation with adaptive variation for evolutionary multi-objective optimization. Eur J Oper Res 197(2):701–713
Tan KC, Goh CK, Yang YJ, Lee TH (2006) Evolving better population distribution and exploration in evolutionary multi-objective optimization. Eur J Oper Res 171(2):463–495
Tan KC, Lee TH, Khor EF (2001) Evolutionary algorithms with dynamic population size and local exploration for multiobjective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 5(6):565–588
Zeng F, Low MYH, Decraene J, Zhou S, Cai W (2010) Self-adptive mechanism for multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of the international multi-conference of engineers and computer scientists, IMECS 2010
Zhang Q, Zhou A, Zhao S, Suganthan PN, Liu W, Tiwari S (2009) Multiobjective optimization test instances for the cec 2009 special session and competition. Technical reports on the school of computer science and electronic engineering
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Abdou, W., Bloch, C. (2020). Trade-Off Between Diversity and Convergence in Multi-objective Genetic Algorithms. In: Adjallah, K., Birregah, B., Abanda, H. (eds) Data-Driven Modeling for Sustainable Engineering. ICEASSM 2017. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 72. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13697-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13697-0_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-13696-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-13697-0
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)