Multi-operator Differential Evolution with MOEA/D for Solving Multi-objective Optimization Problems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26636/jtit.2022.161822Keywords:
differential evolution, multi-objective, mutationoperators, weighted-aggregationAbstract
In this paper, we propose a multi-operator differential evolution variant that incorporates three diverse mutation strategies in MOEA/D. Instead of exploiting the local region, the proposed approach continues to search for optimal solutions in the entire objective space. It explicitly maintains diversity of the population by relying on the benefit of clustering. To promote convergence, the solutions close to the ideal position, in the objective space are given preference in the evolutionary process. The core idea is to ensure diversity of the population by applying multiple mutation schemes and a faster convergence rate, giving preference to solutions based on their proximity to the ideal position in the MOEA/D paradigm. The performance of the proposed algorithm is evaluated by two popular test suites. The experimental results demonstrate that the proposed approach outperforms other MOEA/D algorithms.
Downloads
References
[1] C.A.C. Coello, D.A.V. Veldhuizen, and G.B. Lamont, “Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems”, Kluwer Academic, 2007.
View in Google Scholar
[2] K.C. Tan, E.F. Khor, and T.H. Lee, “Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms and Applications (Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing)”, Springer, 2005.
View in Google Scholar
[3] A. Zhou et al., “Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: A survey of the state of the art”, Swarm Evol. Comput., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 32–49, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2011.03.001
View in Google Scholar
[4] J.D. Knowles and D.W. Corne, “Approximating the nondominated front using the Pareto archived evolution strategy”, Evol. Comput., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 149–172, 2000. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/106365600568167
View in Google Scholar
[5] E. Zitzler, M. Laumanns, and L. Thiele, “SPEA2: Improving the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm for multiobjective optimization”, Evolutionary Methods for Design Optimization and Control with Applications to Industrial Problems, K.C. Giannakoglou, D.T.Tsahalis, J. Periaux, K.D. Papailiou, and T. Fogarty, Eds. Athens,
View in Google Scholar
Greece: Int. Center Numer. Methods Eng., pp. 95–100, 2001.
View in Google Scholar
[6] K. Deb, S. Agrawal, A. Pratap, and T. Meyarivan, “A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II”, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 182–197, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.996017
View in Google Scholar
[7] Q. Zhang, A. Zhou, and Y. Jin, “RM-MEDA: A regularity modelbased multiobjective estimation of distribution algorithm”, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 41–63, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2007.894202
View in Google Scholar
[8] E. Zitzler and S. Kunzli, “Indicator-based selection in multiobjective search”, Parallel Problem Solving from Nature (PPSN VIII), vol. 3242, pp. 832–842, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30217-9_84
View in Google Scholar
[9] J. Bader and E. Zitzler, “HypE: An algorithm for fast hypervolumebased many-objective optimization”, Evol. Comput., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 45–76, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/EVCO_a_00009
View in Google Scholar
[10] D. Brockhoff, T. Wagner, and H. Trautmann, “R2 indicator-based multiobjective search”, Evol. Comput., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 369–395, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/EVCO_a_00135
View in Google Scholar
[11] S. Jiang, J. Zhang, Y.-S. Ong, A.N. Zhang, and P.S. Tan, “A Simple and fast hypervolume indicator-based multiobjective evolutionary algorithm”, IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 2202–2213, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2014.2367526
View in Google Scholar
[12] A. Jaszkiewicz, “On the performance of multiple-objective genetic local search on the 0/1 knapsack problem – a comparative experiment”, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 402–412, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2002.802873
View in Google Scholar
[13] Y. Jin, T. Okabe, and B. Sendho, “Adapting weighted aggregation for multiobjective evolution strategies”, Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization, pp. 96–110, 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44719-9_7
View in Google Scholar
[14] E.J. Hughes, “Multiple single objective Pareto sampling”, Proc. Congr. Evol. Comput., pp. 2678–2684, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2003.1299427
View in Google Scholar
[15] H. Ishibuchi, T. Yoshida, and T. Murata, “Balance between genetic search and local search in memetic algorithms for multiobjective permutation flowshop scheduling”, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 204–223, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2003.810752
View in Google Scholar
[16] Q. Zhang and H. Li, “MOEA/D: A multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition”, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 712–731, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2007.892759
View in Google Scholar
[17] H. Li and Q. Zhang, “Multiobjective optimization problems with complicated Pareto sets, MOEA/D and NSGA-II”, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 284–302, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2008.925798
View in Google Scholar
[18] H. Li, Q. Zhang and J. Deng, “Biased Multiobjective Optimization and Decomposition Algorithm”, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 52–66, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2015.2507366
View in Google Scholar
[19] Y. Yuan, H. Xu, B. Wang, B. Zhang, and X. Yao, “Balancing Convergence and Diversity in Decomposition-Based Many-Objective Optimizers”, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 180–198, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2015.2443001
View in Google Scholar
[20] N. Hansen and S. Kern, “Evaluating the CMA evolution strategy on multimodal test functions”, Parallel Problem Solving from Nature-PPSN VIII, pp. 282–291, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30217-9_29
View in Google Scholar
[21] A. Auger and N. Hansen, “A restart CMA evolution strategy with increasing population size”, Proc. Congr. Evol. Comput., pp. 1769–1776, 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2005.1554902
View in Google Scholar
[22] I. Loshchilov, “CMA-ES with restarts for solving CEC 2013 benchmark problems”, Proc. Congr. Evol. Comput., pp. 369–376, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2013.6557593
View in Google Scholar
[23] N. Srinivas and K. Deb, “Multiobjective optimization using nondominated sorting in genetic algorithms”, Evol. Comput., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 221–248, 1994. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/evco.1994.2.3.221
View in Google Scholar
[24] J. Horn, N. Nafpliotis, and D.E. Goldberg, “A niched Pareto genetic algorithm for multiobjective optimization”, Proc. 1st Int. Conf. Evol. Comput., pp. 82–87, 1994. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEC.1994.350037
View in Google Scholar
[25] P.A.N. Bosman and D. Thierens, “The balance between proximity and diversity in multiobjective evolutionary algorithms”, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 174–188, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2003.810761
View in Google Scholar
[26] E. Zitzler and L. Thiele, “Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: A comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach”, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 257–271, 1999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.797969
View in Google Scholar
[27] M. Fleischer, “The measure of Pareto optima applications to multiobjective metaheuristics”, Proc. Evol. Multi-Criterion Optim., pp. 519–533, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36970-8_37
View in Google Scholar
[28] O. Schutze, X. Esquivel, A. Lara, and C.A.C. Coello, “Using the averaged Hausdorff distance as a performance measure in evolutionary multiobjective optimization”, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 504–522, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2011.2161872
View in Google Scholar
[29] J. Qi, Y. Yu, L. Wang, and J. Liu, “K*-Means: An Effective and Efficient K-Means Clustering Algorithm”, 2016 IEEE International Conferences on Big Data and Cloud Computing (BDCloud), Social Computing and Networking (Social-Com), Sustainable Computing and Communications (Sustain-Com) (BDCloud-SocialCom-SustainCom), pp. 242–249, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/BDCloud-SocialCom-SustainCom.2016.46
View in Google Scholar
[30] X. Ma, Q. Zhang, G. Tian, J. Yang, and Z. Zhu, “On Tchebycheff Decomposition Approaches for Multiobjective Evolutionary Optimization”, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 226–244, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2017.2704118
View in Google Scholar
[31] R. Tanabe and A.S. Fukunaga, “Improving the search performance of shade using linear population size reduction”, 2014 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC), pp. 1658–1665, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2014.6900380
View in Google Scholar
[32] Y. Tian, R. Cheng, X. Zhang, andY. Jin, “PlatEMO:AMatlab platform for evolutionary multi-objective optimization [educational forum]”, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 73–87, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/MCI.2017.2742868
View in Google Scholar
[33] E. Zitzler, K. Deb, and L. Thiele. “Comparison of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: Empirical results”, Evolutionary computation 8.2, pp. 173–195, 2000. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/106365600568202
View in Google Scholar
[34] A. Zhou, Q. Zhang, Y. Jin, and B. Sendhoff, “Adaptive modelling strategy for continuous multi-objective optimization”, Proc. Congr. Evol. Comput., pp. 431–437, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2007.4424503
View in Google Scholar
[35] N. Beume, B. Naujoks, and M. Emmerich, “SMS-EMOA: Multiobjective selection based on dominated hypervolume”, Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 181, no. 3, pp. 1653–1669, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.08.008
View in Google Scholar
[36] A. Auger, J. Bader, D. Brockhoff, and E. Zitzler, “Theory of the hypervolume indicator: Optimal μ-distributions and the choice of the reference point”, Proc. 10th ACM SIGEVO Workshop Found. Genet. Algorithms, pp. 87–102, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1527125.1527138
View in Google Scholar
[37] H. Ishibuchi, Y. Hitotsuyanagi, N. Tsukamoto, and Y. Nojima, “Manyobjective test problems to visually examine the behavior of multiobjective evolution in a decision space”, Proc. Int. Conf. Parallel Prob. Solv. Nat., pp. 91–100, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15871-1_10
View in Google Scholar
[38] T. Wagner, N. Beume, and B. Naujoks, “Pareto-, aggregation-, and indicator-based methods in many-objective optimization”, Proc. Evol. Multi-Criterion Optim., pp. 742–756, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70928-2_56
View in Google Scholar
[39] X. Zou, Y. Chen, M. Liu, and L. Kang, “A new evolutionary algorithm for solving many-objective optimization problems”, IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. B, Cybern., vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 1402–1412, Oct. 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCB.2008.926329
View in Google Scholar
[40] S. Garcia, A. Fernandez, J. Luengo, and F. Herrera, “Advanced nonparametric tests for multiple comparisons in the design of experiments in computational intelligence and data mining: Experimental analysis of power”, Information Sciences, vol. 180, no. 10, pp. 2044–2064, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2009.12.010
View in Google Scholar
Downloads
Submitted
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Telecommunications and Information Technology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
