Abstract
In the field of single-objective optimization, hybrid variants of gradient based methods and evolutionary algorithms have been shown to performance better than the pure evolutionary method. This same idea has been used with Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization (EMO), obtaining also very promising results. In most of the cases, gradient information is used as part of the mutation operator, in order to move every generated point to the exact Pareto front. This means that gradient information is used along the whole process, and then consumes computational resources also along the whole process. On the other hand, in our approach we will use gradient information only at the beginning of the process, and will show that quality of the results is not decreased while computational cost is. We will use a steepest descent method to generate some efficient points to be used to seed an EMO method. The main goal will be generating some efficient points in the exact front using the less evaluations as possible, and let the EMO method use these points to spread along the whole Pareto front. In our approach, we will solve box-constrained continuous problems, gradients will be approximated using quadratic regressions and the EMO method will be based on Rough Sets theory Hernandez-Diaz et al. (Parallel Problem Solving from Nature (PPSN IX) 9th International Conference, 2006).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bosman, P. & de Jong, E. (2005). Exploiting gradient information in numerical multi-objective evolutionary optimization. In Proceedings of the 7th annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO’05) (pp. 755–762). ACM.
Bosman, P. & de Jong, E. (2006). Combining gradient techniques for numerical multi-objective evolutionary optimization. In Proceedings of the 8th annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO’06) (pp. 627–634). ACM.
Brown, M. & Smith, R. E. (2003). Effective use of directional information in multi-objective evolutionary computation. In Proceedings of GECCO 2003, LNCS 2723 (pp. 778–789).
Deb, K. (2001). Multi-Objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms. Chichester, UK: Wiley, (ISBN 0-471-87339-X).
Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., & Meyarivan, T. (2002). A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: Nsga-ii. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(2), 182–197.
Dellnitz, M., Schtze, O., & Hestermeyer, T. (2005). Covering pareto sets by multilevel subdivision techniques. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 124(11), 13–136.
Fliege, J. & Svaiter, B. (2000). Steepest descent methods for multicriteria optimization. Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, 51(3), 479–494.
Hernandez-Diaz, A., Santana-Quintero, L., Coello, C., Caballero, R., & Molina, J. (2006). A new proposal for multi-objective optimization using differential evolution and rough set theory. In In Thomas Philip Runarson et alt.(editors) Parallel Problem Solving from Nature (PPSN IX) 9th Interantional Conference (pp. 483–492).
Lin, T. (1996). Special issue on rough sets. Journal of the Intelligent Automation and Soft Computing, 2(2).
McKay, M., Beckman, R., & Conover, W. (1979). A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics, 21(2), 239–245.
Molina, J., Laguna, M., Marti, R., & Caballero, R. (2007). Sspmo: A scatter tabu search procedure for non-linear multiobjective optimization. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 19(1), 91–100.
Pawlak, Z. (1982). Rough sets. International Journal of Computer and Information Sciences, 11(1), 341–356.
Pawlak, Z. (1991). Rough Sets: Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Data. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Schaffler, S., Schultz, R., & Weinzierl, K. (2002). Stochastic method for the solution of unconstrained vector optimization problems. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 114(1), 209–222.
Shukla, P. K. (2007). On gradient based local search methods in unconstrained evolutionary multi-objective optimization. In Proceedings of EMO 2007, LNCS 4403, (pp. 96–110).
Steuer, R. E. (1986). Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application. New York: Wiley.
Xiaolin Hu, Z. H. & Wang, Z. (2003). Hybridization of the multi-objective evolutionary algorithms and the gradient-based algorithms. In Congress on Evolutionary Computation 2003 (CEC’03) (Vol. 2, pp. 870–877).
Zitzler, E. & Thiele, L. (1999). Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: A comparative case study and the strength pareto approach. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 3(4), 257–271.
Zitzler, E., Deb, K., & Thiele, L. (2000). Comparison of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: Empirical results. Evolutionary Computation, 8(2), 173–195.
Zitzler, E., Thiele, L., Laumanns, M., Fonseca, C., & da Fonseca, V. (2003). Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 7(2), 117–132.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hernandez-Diaz, A.G., Coello, C.A., Perez, F., Caballero, R., Molina, J. (2010). Using a Gradient Based Method to Seed an EMO Algorithm. In: Ehrgott, M., Naujoks, B., Stewart, T., Wallenius, J. (eds) Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Sustainable Energy and Transportation Systems. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, vol 634. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04045-0_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04045-0_28
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04044-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04045-0
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)