Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Adaptive weighted-sum method for bi-objective optimization: Pareto front generation

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents a new method that effectively determines a Pareto front for bi-objective optimization with potential application to multiple objectives. A traditional method for multiobjective optimization is the weighted-sum method, which seeks Pareto optimal solutions one by one by systematically changing the weights among the objective functions. Previous research has shown that this method often produces poorly distributed solutions along a Pareto front, and that it does not find Pareto optimal solutions in non-convex regions. The proposed adaptive weighted sum method focuses on unexplored regions by changing the weights adaptively rather than by using a priori weight selections and by specifying additional inequality constraints. It is demonstrated that the adaptive weighted sum method produces well-distributed solutions, finds Pareto optimal solutions in non-convex regions, and neglects non-Pareto optimal solutions. This last point can be a potential liability of Normal Boundary Intersection, an otherwise successful multiobjective method, which is mainly caused by its reliance on equality constraints. The promise of this robust algorithm is demonstrated with two numerical examples and a simple structural optimization problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Das, I.; Dennis, J.E. 1997: A closer look at drawbacks of minimizing weighted sums of objectives for Pareto set generation in multicriteria optimization problems. Struct Optim14, 63–69

    Google Scholar 

  2. Das, I.; Dennis, J.E. 1998: Normal-Boundary Intersection: A New Method for Generating Pareto Optimal Points in Multicriteria Optimization Problems. SIAM J Optim8, 631–657

    Google Scholar 

  3. Fonseca, C.; Fleming, P. 1995: An overview of evolutionary algorithms in multiobjective optimization. Evol Comput3, 1–18

    Google Scholar 

  4. Goldberg, D.E. 1989: Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley

  5. Koski, J. 1985: Defectiveness of weighting method in multicriterion optimization of structures. Commun Appl Numer Methods1, 333–337

    Google Scholar 

  6. Koski, J. 1988: Multicriteria truss optimization. In: Stadler, W. (ed.) Multicriteria Optimization in Engineering and in the Sciences, New York: Plenum

  7. Lin, J. 1976: Multiple objective problems: Pareto-optimal solutions by method of proper equality constraints. IEEE Trans Autom Control21, 641–650

    Google Scholar 

  8. Marglin, S. 1967: Public Investment Criteria. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

  9. Messac, A.; Mattson, C.A. 2002: Generating Well-Distributed Sets of Pareto Points for Engineering Design using Physical Programming. Optim Eng3, 431–450

    Google Scholar 

  10. Messac, A.; Ismail-Yahaya, A.; Mattson, C.A. 2003: The Normalized Normal Constraint Method for Generating the Pareto Frontier. Struct Multidisc Optim25, 86–98

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mattson, C.A.; Messac, A. 2003: Concept Selection Using s-Pareto Frontiers. AIAA J41, 1190–1204

    Google Scholar 

  12. Messac, A.; Mattson, C.A. 2004: Normal Constraint Method with Guarantee of Even Representation of Complete Pareto Frontier. AIAA J42

  13. Pareto, V. 1906: Manuale di Economia Politica, Societa Editrice Libraria, Milano, Italy. Translated into English by Schwier, A.S. 1971: Manual of Political Economy, New York: Macmillan

  14. Stadler, W. 1979: A Survey of Multicriteria Optimization, or the Vector Maximum Problem. JOTA29, 1–52

    Google Scholar 

  15. Stadler, W. 1984: Applications of Multicriteria Optimization in Engineering and the Sciences (A Survey). In: Zeleny, M. (ed.) Multiple Criteria Decision Making – Past Decade and Future Trends. Greenwich, CT: JAI

  16. Steuer, R.E. 1986: Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation and Application. New York: Wiley

  17. Suppapitnarm, A.; Seffen, K.A.; Parks, G.T.; Clarkson, P.J. 2000: A simulated annealing algorithm for multiobjective optimization. Eng Optim33(1), 59–85

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schy, A.A.; Giesy, D.P. 1988: Multicriteria Optimization for Design of Aircraft Control Systems. In: Stadler, W. (ed.) Multicriteria Optimization in Engineering and in the Sciences, New York: Plenum, p.225–262

  19. Tamaki, H.; Kita, H.; Kobayashi, S. 1996: Multiobjective optimization by genetic algorithms: a review. 1996 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, ICEC 1996, Nagoya, Japan

  20. Zadeh, L. 1963: Optimality and Non-Scalar-Valued Performance Criteria. IEEE Trans Autom Control8, 59–60

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Engineering Systems Division, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02139, USA

    I.Y. Kim & O.L. de Weck

Authors
  1. I.Y. Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. O.L. de Weck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O.L. de Weck.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, I., de Weck, O. Adaptive weighted-sum method for bi-objective optimization: Pareto front generation. Struct Multidisc Optim 29, 149–158 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-004-0465-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-004-0465-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation