Selective breeding in a multiobjective genetic algorithm

  • G. T. Parks
  • I. Miller
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1498)


This paper describes an investigation of the efficacy of various elitist selection strategies in a multiobjective Genetic Algorithm implementation, with parents being selected both from the current population and from the archive record of nondominated solutions encountered during search. It is concluded that, because the multiobjective optimization process naturally maintains diversity in the population, it is possible to improve the performance of the algorithm through the use of strong elitism and high selection pressures without suffering the disadvantages of genetic convergence which such strategies would bring in single objective optimization.


Pareto Front Multiobjective Optimization Fuel Assembly Nondominated Solution Multiobjective Genetic Algorithm 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Fonseca, C.M., Fleming, P.J.: An overview of evolutionary algorithms in multiobjective optimization. Evol. Comp. 3 (1995) 1–16zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Downar, T.J., Sesonske, A.: Light water reactor fuel cycle optimization: theory versus practice. Adv. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 20 (1988) 71–126Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Parks, G.T.: Multiobjective PWR reload core design by nondominated Genetic Algorithm search. Nucl. Sci. Eng. 124 (1996) 178–187Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Poon, P.W., Parks, G.T.: Application of Genetic Algorithms to in-core nuclear fuel management optimization. Proc. Joint Int. Conf. Mathematical Methods and Supercomputing in Nuclear Applications, Karlsruhe 1 (1993) 777–786Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kropaczek, D.J., Turinsky, P.J., Parks, G.T., Maldonado, G.I.: The efficiency and fidelity of the in-core nuclear fuel management code FORMOSA-P, Reactor Physics and Reactor Computations (Edited by Y. Ronen and E. Elias), Ben Gurion University of the Negev Press (1994) 572–579Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kropaczek, D.J., Parks, G.T., Maldonado, G.I., Turinsky, P.J.: Application of Simulated Annealing to in-core nuclear fuel management optimization. Proc. 1991 Int. Top. Mtg. Advances in Mathematics, Computations and Reactor Physics, ANS, Pittsburgh PA 5 (1991) 22.1 1.1–1.12Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goldberg, D.E.: Genetic Algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Addison Wesley, Reading MA (1989)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Srinivas, N., Deb, K.: Multiobjective optimization using nondominated sorting in Genetic Algorithms. Evol. Comp. 2 (1994) 221–248Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baker, J.E.: Adaptive selection methods for Genetic Algorithms. Proc. Int. Conf. Genetic Algorithms and their Applications, Pittsburgh PA (Edited J.J. Grefenstette), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale NJ (1985) 101–111Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. T. Parks
    • 1
  • I. Miller
    • 1
  1. 1.Engineering Design CentreCambridge University Engineering DepartmentCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations