On the Assessment of Multiobjective Approaches to the Adaptive Distributed Database Management Problem

Authors:
Joshua D. Knowles;David Corne;Martin J. Oates
Affiliations:
-;-;-
Venue:
PPSN VI Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature
Year:
2000

Citing 5
Cited 1

Multiobjective evolutionary algorithm test suites

Proceedings of the 1999 ACM symposium on Applied computing
On the Performance Assessment and Comparison of Stochastic Multiobjective Optimizers

PPSN IV Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature
Investigating Evolutionary Approaches to Adaptive Database Management Against Various Quality of Service Metrics

PPSN V Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature
Approximating the Nondominated Front Using the Pareto Archived Evolution Strategy

Evolutionary Computation
Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case studyand the strength Pareto approach

IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation

Ordered Incremental Multi-Objective Problem Solving Based on Genetic Algorithms

International Journal of Applied Evolutionary Computation

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In this paper we assess the performance of three modern multiobjective evolutionary algorithms on a real-world optimization problem related to the management of distributed databases. The algorithms assessed axe the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm (SPEA), the Pareto Archived Evolution Strategy (PAES), and M-PAES, which is a Memetic Algorithm based variant of PAES. The performance of these algorithms is compared using two distinct and sophisticated multiobjective-performance comparison techniques, and extensions to these comparison techniques are proposed. The information provided by the different performance assessment techniques is compared, and we find that, to some extent, the ranking of algorithm performance alters according to the comparison metric; however, it is possible to understand these differences in terms of the complex nature of multiobjective comparisons.