1 / 24

Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization – A Big Picture

Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization – A Big Picture. Karthik Sindhya , PhD. Postdoctoral Researcher Industrial Optimization Group Department of Mathematical Information Technology Karthik.sindhya@jyu.fi http://users.jyu.fi/~kasindhy/. Objectives

gari
Download Presentation

Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization – A Big Picture

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. EvolutionaryMulti-objectiveOptimization – A Big Picture KarthikSindhya, PhD Postdoctoral Researcher Industrial Optimization Group Department of Mathematical Information Technology Karthik.sindhya@jyu.fi http://users.jyu.fi/~kasindhy/

  2. Objectives The objectives of this lecture are to: • Discuss the transition: Single objective optimization toMulti-objective optimization • Review the basic terminologies and concepts in use in multi-objective optimization • Introduce evolutionary multi-objective optimization • Goals in evolutionary multi-objective optimization • Main Issues in evolutionary multi-objective optimization

  3. Reference • Books: • K. Deb. Multi-Objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms. Wiley, Chichester, 2001. • K. Miettinen. Nonlinear MultiobjectiveOptimization. Kluwer, Boston, 1999.

  4. Transition Single objective: Maximize Performance Minimize: Cost Maximize: Performance

  5. Basic terminologies and concepts • Multi-objective problem is usually of the form: Minimize/Maximize f(x) = (f1(x), f2(x),…,fk(x)) subject to gj(x) ≥ 0 hk(x) = 0 xL ≤ x ≤ xU Multiple objectives, constraints and decision variables Objective space Decision space

  6. Basic terminologies and concepts • Concept of non-dominated solutions: • solution a dominates solution b, if • a is no worse than b in all objectives • a is strictly better than b in at least one objective. 1 2 5 3 f2 (minimize) 4 2 3 2 6 4 5 • 3 dominates 2 and 4 • 1 does not dominate 3 and 4 • 1 dominates 2 f1 (minimize)

  7. Basic terminologies and concepts • Properties of dominance relationship • Reflexive: The dominance relation is not reflexive. • Since solution a does not dominate itself. • Symmetric: The dominance relation is not symmetric. • Solution a dominates b does not mean b dominated a. • Dominance relation is asymmetric. • Dominance relation is not antisymmetric. • Transitive: The dominance relation is transitive. • If a dominates b and b dominates c, then a dominates c. • If a does not dominate b, it does not mean b dominates a.

  8. Basic terminologies and concepts • Finding Pareto-optimal/non-dominated solutions • Among a set of solutions P, the non-dominated set of solutions P’ are those that are not dominated by any member of the set P. • If the set of solutions considered is the entire feasible objective space, P’ is Pareto optimal. • Different approaches available. They differ in computational complexities. • Naive and slow • Worst time complexity is 0(MN2). • Kung et al. approach • O(NlogN)

  9. Basic terminologies and concepts • Kung et al. approach • Step 1: Sort objective 1 based on the descending order of importance. • Ascending order for minimization objective 1 2 5 3 f2 (minimize) 4 2 3 5 2 6 4 5 P = {5,1,3,2,4} f1 (minimize)

  10. Basic terminologies and concepts P = {5,1,3,2,4} Front(P) = {5} Front = {5} T = {5,1,3} B = {2,4} Front = {2,4} {5,1} {3} {2} {4} Front = {5} {5} {1}

  11. Basic terminologies and concepts • Non-dominated sorting of population • Step 1: Set all non-dominated fronts Pj, j = 1,2,… as empty sets and set non-domination level counter j = 1 • Step 2: Use any one of the approaches to find the non-dominated set P’ of population P. • Step 3: Update Pj = P’ and P = P\P’. • Step 4: If P ≠ φ, increment j = j + 1 and go to Step 2. Otherwise, stop and declare all non-dominated fronts Pi, i = 1,2,…,j.

  12. Basic terminologies and concepts 1 2 f2 (minimize) 4 3 5 f1 (minimize) Front 2 Front 3 f2 (minimize) Front 1 f1 (minimize)

  13. Basic terminologies and concepts • Pareto optimal fronts (objective space) • For a K objective problem, usually Pareto front is K-1 dimensional Min-Max Max-Max Min-Min Max-Min

  14. Basic terminologies and concepts • Local and Global Pareto optimal front • Local Pareto optimal front: Local dominance check. • Global Pareto optimal front is also local Pareto optimal front. Objective space Decision space Locally Pareto optimal front

  15. Basic terminologies and concepts • Ideal point: • Non-existent • lower bound of the Pareto front. • Nadir point: • Upper bound of the Pareto front. • Normalization of objective vectors: • fnormi = (fi -ziutopia)/(zinadir-ziutopia) • Max point: • A vector formed by the maximum objective function values of the entire/part of objective space. • Usually used in evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithms, as nadir point is difficult to estimate. • Used as an estimate of nadir point and updated as and when new estimates are obtained. Objective space Zmaximum Min-Min f2 Znadir Zideal ε Zutopia ε f1

  16. Basic terminologies and concepts • What are evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithms? • Evolutionary algorithms used to solve multi-objective optimization problems. • EMO algorithms use a population of solutions to obtain a diverse set of solutions close to the Pareto optimal front. Objective space

  17. Basic terminologies and concepts • EMO is a population based approach • Population evolves to finally converge on to the Pareto front. • Multiple optimal solutions in a single run. • In classical MCDM approaches • Usually multiple runs necessary to obtain a set of Pareto optimal solutions. • Usually problem knowledge is necessary.

  18. Goal in evolutionary multi-objective optimization • Goals in evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithms • To find a set of solutions as close as possible to the Pareto optimal front. • To find a set of solutions as diverse as possible. • To find a set of satisficing solutions reflecting the decision maker’s preferences. • Satisficing: a decision-making strategy that attempts to meet criteria for adequacy, rather than to identify an optimal solution.

  19. Goal in evolutionary multi-objective optimization Objective space Convergence Diversity

  20. Goal in evolutionary multi-objective optimization Objective space Convergence

  21. Goal in evolutionary multi-objective optimization • Changes to single objective evolutionary algorithms • Fitness computation must be changed • Non-dominated solutions are preferred to maintain the drive towards the Pareto optimal front (attain convergence) • Emphasis to be given to less crowded or isolated solutions to maintain diversity in the population

  22. Goal in evolutionary multi-objective optimization • What are less-crowded solutions ? • Crowding can occur in decision space and/or objective phase. • Decision space diversity sometimes are needed • As in engineering design problems, all solutions would look the same. Objective space Decision space Min-Min

  23. Main Issues in evolutionary multi-objective optimization • How to maintain diversity and obtain a diverse set of Pareto optimal solutions? • How to maintain non-dominated solutions? • How to maintain the push towards the Pareto front ? (Achieve convergence)

  24. EMO History • 1984 – VEGA by Schaffer • 1989 – Goldberg suggestion • 1993-95 - Non-Elitist methods • MOGA, NSGA, NPGA • 1998 – Present – Elitist methods • NSGA-II, DPGA, SPEA, PAES etc.

More Related