4.7 Article

A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION
Volume 6, Issue 2, Pages 182-197

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/4235.996017

Keywords

constraint handling; elitism; genetic algorithms; multicriterion decision making; multiobjective optimization; Pareto-optimal solutions

Ask authors/readers for more resources

MuItiobjective evolutionary algorithms (EAs) that use nondominated sorting and sharing have been criticized mainly for their: 1) O(MN3) computational complexity (where M is the number of objectives and N is the population size); 2) nonelitism approach; and 3) the need for specifying a sharing parameter. In this paper, we suggest a nondominated sorting-based multiobjective EA (MOEA), called nondominated sorting genetic algorithm Il (NSGA-II). which alleviates all the above three difficulties. Specifically, a fast nondominated sorting approach with O(MN2) computational complexity is presented. Also, a selection operator is presented that creates a mating pool by combining the parent and offspring populations and selecting the best (with respect to fitness and spread) N solutions. Simulation results on difficult test problems show that the proposed NSGA-II, in most problems, is able to find much better spread of solutions and better convergence near the true Pareto-optimal front compared to Pareto-archived evolution strategy and strength-Pareto EA-two other elitist MOEAs that pay special attention to creating a diverse Pareto-optimal front. Moreover, we modify the definition of dominance in order to solve constrained multiobjective problems efficiently. Simulation results of the constrained NSGA-II on a number of test problems, including a five-objective seven-constraint nonlinear problem, are compared with another constrained muItiobjective optimizer and much better performance of NSGA-II is observed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available