Constrained many-objective optimization: a way forward

Authors:
Dhish Kumar Saxena;Tapabrata Ray;Kalyanmoy Deb;Ashutosh Tiwari
Affiliations:
Design Optimization with Manufacturing Department, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK;School of Aerospace, Civil and Mechanical Engineering, University of New South Wales, Australian Defence Force Academy, Australia;Department of Business Technology, Helsinki School of Economics and Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India;Manufacturing Department, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK
Venue:
CEC'09 Proceedings of the Eleventh conference on Congress on Evolutionary Computation
Year:
2009

Citing 12
Cited 0

Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms

Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms
Combining convergence and diversity in evolutionary multiobjective optimization

Evolutionary Computation
Learning a kernel matrix for nonlinear dimensionality reduction

ICML '04 Proceedings of the twenty-first international conference on Machine learning
Techniques for highly multiobjective optimisation: some nondominated points are better than others

Proceedings of the 9th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation
An introduction to nonlinear dimensionality reduction by maximum variance unfolding

AAAI'06 proceedings of the 21st national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2
Controlling dominance area of solutions and its impact on the performance of MOEAs

EMO'07 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization
Substitute distance assignments in NSGA-II for handling many-objective optimization problems

EMO'07 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization
Non-linear dimensionality reduction procedures for certain large-dimensional multi-objective optimization problems: employing correntropy and a novel maximum variance unfolding

EMO'07 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization
Unsupervised learning of image manifolds by semidefinite programming

CVPR'04 Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE computer society conference on Computer vision and pattern recognition
Incorporation of scalarizing fitness functions into evolutionary multiobjective optimization algorithms

PPSN'06 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature
Are all objectives necessary? on dimensionality reduction in evolutionary multiobjective optimization

PPSN'06 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature
MOEA/D: A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Decomposition

IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Many objective optimization is a natural extension to multi-objective optimization where the number of objectives are significantly more than five. The performance of current state of the art algorithms (e.g. NSGA-II, SPEA2) is known to deteriorate significantly with increasing number of objectives due to the lack of adequate convergence pressure. It is of no surprise that the performance of NSGA-II on some constrained many-objective optimization problems [7] (e.g., DTLZ5-(5,M), M = 10, 20) in an earlier study [18] was far from satisfactory. Till date, research in many-objective optimization has focussed on two major areas (a) dimensionality reduction in the objective space and (b) preference ordering based approaches. This paper introduces a novel evolutionary algorithm powered by epsilon dominance (implemented within the framework of NSGA-II) and controlled infeasibility for improved convergence while the critical set of objectives is identified through a nonlinear dimensionality reduction scheme. Since approaching the Pareto-optimal front from within the feasible search space will need to overcome the problems associated with low selection pressure, the mechanism to approach the front from within the infeasible search space is promising as illustrated in this paper. The performance of the proposed algorithm is compared with NSGA-II (original, with crowding distance measure) and NSGA-II (epsilon dominance) on the above set of constrained multiobjective problems to highlight the benefits.