scholarly journals Surrogate Modeling Approaches for Multiobjective Optimization: Methods, Taxonomy, and Results

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
Kalyanmoy Deb ◽  
Proteek Chandan Roy ◽  
Rayan Hussein
Keyword(s):  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Optimal Solution ◽  
Adaptive Strategy ◽  
Optimization Methods ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Pareto Optimal ◽  
Optimization Strategy ◽  
Conflicting Objectives ◽  
The Individual

Most practical optimization problems are comprised of multiple conflicting objectives and constraints which involve time-consuming simulations. Construction of metamodels of objectives and constraints from a few high-fidelity solutions and a subsequent optimization of metamodels to find in-fill solutions in an iterative manner remain a common metamodeling based optimization strategy. The authors have previously proposed a taxonomy of 10 different metamodeling frameworks for multiobjective optimization problems, each of which constructs metamodels of objectives and constraints independently or in an aggregated manner. Of the 10 frameworks, five follow a generative approach in which a single Pareto-optimal solution is found at a time and other five frameworks were proposed to find multiple Pareto-optimal solutions simultaneously. Of the 10 frameworks, two frameworks (M3-2 and M4-2) are detailed here for the first time involving multimodal optimization methods. In this paper, we also propose an adaptive switching based metamodeling (ASM) approach by switching among all 10 frameworks in successive epochs using a statistical comparison of metamodeling accuracy of all 10 frameworks. On 18 problems from three to five objectives, the ASM approach performs better than the individual frameworks alone. Finally, the ASM approach is compared with three other recently proposed multiobjective metamodeling methods and superior performance of the ASM approach is observed. With growing interest in metamodeling approaches for multiobjective optimization, this paper evaluates existing strategies and proposes a viable adaptive strategy by portraying importance of using an ensemble of metamodeling frameworks for a more reliable multiobjective optimization for a limited budget of solution evaluations.

scholarly journals MODIFICATION OF FIREWORKS METHOD FOR MULTIOBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION BASED ON NON-DOMINATED SORTING

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 67-78
Author(s):  
A. V. Panteleev ◽  
A. U. Krychkov
Keyword(s):  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Complex Structure ◽  
Optimal Solution ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Pareto Optimal ◽  
Pareto Optimal Solutions ◽  
Optimal Solutions ◽  
Equal Importance ◽  
Approximate Result

The article suggests a modification for numerical fireworks method of the single-objective optimization for solving the problem of multiobjective optimization. The method is metaheuristic. It does not guarantee finding the exact solution, but can give a good approximate result. Multiobjective optimization problem is considered with numerical criteria of equal importance. A possible solution to the problem is a vector of real numbers. Each component of the vector of a possible solution belongs to a certain segment. The optimal solution of the problem is considered a Pareto optimal solution. Because the set of Pareto optimal solutions can be infinite; we consider a method for finding an approximation consisting of a finite number of Pareto optimal solutions. The modification is based on the procedure of non-dominated sorting. It is the main procedure for solutions search. Non-dominated sorting is the ranking of decisions based on the values of the numerical vector obtained using the criteria. Solutions are divided into disjoint subsets. The first subset is the Pareto optimal solutions, the second subset is the Pareto optimal solutions if the first subset is not taken into account, and the last subset is the Pareto optimal solutions if the rest subsets are not taken into account. After such a partition, the decision is made to create new solutions. The method was tested on well-known bi-objective optimization problems: ZDT2, LZ01. Structure of the location of Pareto optimal solutions differs for the problems. LZ01 have complex structure of Pareto optimal solutions. In conclusion, the question of future research and the issue of modifying the method for problems with general constraints are discussed.

scholarly journals Using Shapley Values and Genetic Algorithms to Solve Multiobjective Optimization Problems

Symmetry ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 2021
Author(s):  
Hsien-Chung Wu
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Algorithms ◽  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Cooperative Game ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Optimal Solution ◽  
Payoff Function ◽  
Pareto Optimal ◽  
Objective Functions ◽  
Multiobjective Optimization Problems ◽  
Shapley Values

This paper proposes a new methodology to solve multiobjective optimization problems by invoking genetic algorithms and the concept of the Shapley values of cooperative games. It is well known that the Pareto-optimal solutions of multiobjective optimization problems can be obtained by solving the corresponding weighting problems that are formulated by assigning some suitable weights to the objective functions. In this paper, we formulated a cooperative game from the original multiobjective optimization problem by regarding the objective functions as the corresponding players. The payoff function of this formulated cooperative game involves the symmetric concept, which means that the payoff function only depends on the number of players in a coalition and is independent of the role of players in this coalition. In this case, we can reasonably set up the weights as the corresponding Shapley values of this formulated cooperative game. Under these settings, we can obtain the so-called Shapley–Pareto-optimal solution. In order to choose the best Shapley–Pareto-optimal solution, we used genetic algorithms by setting a reasonable fitness function.

scholarly journals The Evolutionary Algorithm to Find Robust Pareto-Optimal Solutions over Time

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meirong Chen ◽  
Yinan Guo ◽  
Haiyuan Liu ◽  
Chun Wang
Keyword(s):  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Optimization Methods ◽  
Pareto Optimal ◽  
Pareto Optimal Solutions ◽  
Optimal Solutions ◽  
Multiobjective Optimization Problems ◽  
Dynamic Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Pareto Fronts ◽  
Over Time

In dynamic multiobjective optimization problems, the environmental parameters change over time, which makes the true pareto fronts shifted. So far, most works of research on dynamic multiobjective optimization methods have concentrated on detecting the changed environment and triggering the population based optimization methods so as to track the moving pareto fronts over time. Yet, in many real-world applications, it is not necessary to find the optimal nondominant solutions in each dynamic environment. To solve this weakness, a novel method called robust pareto-optimal solution over time is proposed. It is in fact to replace the optimal pareto front at each time-varying moment with the series of robust pareto-optimal solutions. This means that each robust solution can fit for more than one time-varying moment. Two metrics, including the average survival time and average robust generational distance, are present to measure the robustness of the robust pareto solution set. Another contribution is to construct the algorithm framework searching for robust pareto-optimal solutions over time based on the survival time. Experimental results indicate that this definition is a more practical and time-saving method of addressing dynamic multiobjective optimization problems changing over time.

scholarly journals Cooperative multiobjective optimization with bounds on objective functions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Kaliszewski ◽  
J. Miroforidis
Keyword(s):  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Optimal Solution ◽  
Knapsack Problems ◽  
Mixed Integer ◽  
Pareto Optimal ◽  
Multidimensional Knapsack ◽  
Multiobjective Optimization Problems ◽  
Time Limitations

Abstract When solving large-scale multiobjective optimization problems, solvers can get stuck because of memory and/or time limitations. In such cases, one is left with no information on the distance to the best feasible solution, found before the optimization process has stopped, to the true Pareto optimal solution. In this work, we show how to provide such information. To this aim we make use of the concept of lower shells and upper shells, developed in our earlier works. No specific assumptions about the problems to be solved are made. We illustrate the proposed approach on biobjective multidimensional knapsack problems derived from single-objective multidimensional knapsack problems in the Beasley OR Library. We address cases when a top-class commercial mixed-integer linear solver fails to provide Pareto optimal solutions attempted to be derived by scalarization.

scholarly journals Assessing the Performance of Interactive Multiobjective Optimization Methods

2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Bekir Afsar ◽  
Kaisa Miettinen ◽  
Francisco Ruiz
Keyword(s):  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Decision Maker ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Optimization Methods ◽  
Interactive Methods ◽  
Value Functions ◽  
Technical Aspects ◽  
Preference Information ◽  
Multiobjective Optimization Problems ◽  
Human Decision

Interactive methods are useful decision-making tools for multiobjective optimization problems, because they allow a decision-maker to provide her/his preference information iteratively in a comfortable way at the same time as (s)he learns about all different aspects of the problem. A wide variety of interactive methods is nowadays available, and they differ from each other in both technical aspects and type of preference information employed. Therefore, assessing the performance of interactive methods can help users to choose the most appropriate one for a given problem. This is a challenging task, which has been tackled from different perspectives in the published literature. We present a bibliographic survey of papers where interactive multiobjective optimization methods have been assessed (either individually or compared to other methods). Besides other features, we collect information about the type of decision-maker involved (utility or value functions, artificial or human decision-maker), the type of preference information provided, and aspects of interactive methods that were somehow measured. Based on the survey and on our own experiences, we identify a series of desirable properties of interactive methods that we believe should be assessed.

Multiobjective Optimization for High Dimensional Expensively Constrained Black-Box Problems

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-59
Author(s):  
George Cheng ◽  
G. Gary Wang ◽  
Yeong-Maw Hwang
Keyword(s):  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Trust Region ◽  
Adaptive Strategy ◽  
Black Box ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
High Dimensional ◽  
Multi Objective Optimization ◽  
Semiconductor Substrate ◽  
Multi Objective ◽  
Computationally Expensive

Abstract Multi-objective optimization (MOO) problems with computationally expensive constraints are commonly seen in real-world engineering design. However, metamodel based design optimization (MBDO) approaches for MOO are often not suitable for high-dimensional problems and often do not support expensive constraints. In this work, the Situational Adaptive Kreisselmeier and Steinhauser (SAKS) method was combined with a new multi-objective trust region optimizer (MTRO) strategy to form the SAKS-MTRO method for MOO problems with expensive black-box constraint functions. The SAKS method is an approach that hybridizes the modeling and aggregation of expensive constraints and adds an adaptive strategy to control the level of hybridization. The MTRO strategy uses a combination of objective decomposition and K-means clustering to handle MOO problems. SAKS-MTRO was benchmarked against four popular multi-objective optimizers and demonstrated superior performance on average. SAKS-MTRO was also applied to optimize the design of a semiconductor substrate and the design of an industrial recessed impeller.

An improved proximal method with quasi-distance for nonconvex multiobjective optimization problem

2022 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fouzia Amir ◽  
Ali Farajzadeh ◽  
Jehad Alzabut
Keyword(s):  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Optimal Solution ◽  
Convergence Result ◽  
Proximal Method ◽  
Pareto Solution ◽  
Multiobjective Optimization Problems ◽  
Locally Lipschitz ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Constrained Multiobjective Optimization

Abstract Multiobjective optimization is the optimization with several conflicting objective functions. However, it is generally tough to find an optimal solution that satisfies all objectives from a mathematical frame of reference. The main objective of this article is to present an improved proximal method involving quasi-distance for constrained multiobjective optimization problems under the locally Lipschitz condition of the cost function. An instigation to study the proximal method with quasi distances is due to its widespread applications of the quasi distances in computer theory. To study the convergence result, Fritz John’s necessary optimality condition for weak Pareto solution is used. The suitable conditions to guarantee that the cluster points of the generated sequences are Pareto–Clarke critical points are provided.

Multi Objective Design Optimization of Two Bar Truss Using NSGA II and TOPSIS

2014 ◽  
Vol 984-985 ◽  
pp. 419-424
Author(s):  
P. Sabarinath ◽  
M.R. Thansekhar ◽  
R. Saravanan
Keyword(s):  
Design Optimization ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Optimization Methods ◽  
Optimal Solutions ◽  
Objective Functions ◽  
Nsga Ii ◽  
Multi Objective ◽  
Total Displacement ◽  
Design Variables ◽  
Conflicting Objectives

Arriving optimal solutions is one of the important tasks in engineering design. Many real-world design optimization problems involve multiple conflicting objectives. The design variables are of continuous or discrete in nature. In general, for solving Multi Objective Optimization methods weight method is preferred. In this method, all the objective functions are converted into a single objective function by assigning suitable weights to each objective functions. The main drawback lies in the selection of proper weights. Recently, evolutionary algorithms are used to find the nondominated optimal solutions called as Pareto optimal front in a single run. In recent years, Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II) finds increasing applications in solving multi objective problems comprising of conflicting objectives because of low computational requirements, elitism and parameter-less sharing approach. In this work, we propose a methodology which integrates NSGA-II and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) for solving a two bar truss problem. NSGA-II searches for the Pareto set where two bar truss is evaluated in terms of minimizing the weight of the truss and minimizing the total displacement of the joint under the given load. Subsequently, TOPSIS selects the best compromise solution.

scholarly journals Comparing interactive evolutionary multiobjective optimization methods with an artificial decision maker

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bekir Afsar ◽  
Ana B. Ruiz ◽  
Kaisa Miettinen
Keyword(s):  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Decision Maker ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Optimization Methods ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Interactive Methods ◽  
Preference Information ◽  
Evolutionary Methods ◽  
Solution Processes ◽  
Trade Offs

AbstractSolving multiobjective optimization problems with interactive methods enables a decision maker with domain expertise to direct the search for the most preferred trade-offs with preference information and learn about the problem. There are different interactive methods, and it is important to compare them and find the best-suited one for solving the problem in question. Comparisons with real decision makers are expensive, and artificial decision makers (ADMs) have been proposed to simulate humans in basic testing before involving real decision makers. Existing ADMs only consider one type of preference information. In this paper, we propose ADM-II, which is tailored to assess several interactive evolutionary methods and is able to handle different types of preference information. We consider two phases of interactive solution processes, i.e., learning and decision phases separately, so that the proposed ADM-II generates preference information in different ways in each of them to reflect the nature of the phases. We demonstrate how ADM-II can be applied with different methods and problems. We also propose an indicator to assess and compare the performance of interactive evolutionary methods.

A Particle Swarm Optimizer for Constrained Multiobjective Optimization

2015 ◽  
pp. 1246-1276
Author(s):  
Wen Fung Leong ◽  
Yali Wu ◽  
Gary G. Yen
Keyword(s):  
Multiobjective Optimization ◽  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Particle Swarm ◽  
Optimal Solution ◽  
Constraint Handling ◽  
Benchmark Problems ◽  
Particle Swarm Optimizer ◽  
Multiobjective Optimization Problems ◽  
Feasible Solutions ◽  
Constrained Multiobjective Optimization

Generally, constraint-handling techniques are designed for evolutionary algorithms to solve Constrained Multiobjective Optimization Problems (CMOPs). Most Multiojective Particle Swarm Optimization (MOPSO) designs adopt these existing constraint-handling techniques to deal with CMOPs. In this chapter, the authors present a constrained MOPSO in which the information related to particles' infeasibility and feasibility status is utilized effectively to guide the particles to search for feasible solutions and to improve the quality of the optimal solution found. The updating of personal best archive is based on the particles' Pareto ranks and their constraint violations. The infeasible global best archive is adopted to store infeasible nondominated solutions. The acceleration constants are adjusted depending on the personal bests' and selected global bests' infeasibility and feasibility statuses. The personal bests' feasibility statuses are integrated to estimate the mutation rate in the mutation procedure. The simulation results indicate that the proposed constrained MOPSO is highly competitive in solving selected benchmark problems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document