4.7 Article

A Generator for Multiobjective Test Problems With Difficult-to-Approximate Pareto Front Boundaries

期刊

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TEVC.2018.2872453

关键词

Difficult-to-approximate (DtA); evolutionary algorithm; multiobjective optimization; Pareto front (PF) boundaries; test problem

资金

  1. Data Science and Artificial Intelligence Research Centre at Nanyang Technological University
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFC0809801]
  3. National Science Foundation of China [61573279]
  4. ANR/RGC Joint Research Scheme - Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
  5. France National Research Agency Project [A-CityU101/16]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In some real-world applications, it has been found that the performance of multiobjective optimization evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) may deteriorate when boundary solutions in the Pareto front (PF) are more difficult to approximate than others. Such a problem feature, referred to as difficult-to-approximate (DtA) PF boundaries, is seldom considered in existing multiobjective optimization test problems. To fill this gap and facilitate possible systematic studies, we introduce a new test problem generator. The proposed generator enables the design of test problems with controllable difficulties regarding the feature of DtA PF boundaries. Three representative MOEAs, NSGA-II, SMS-EMOA, and MOEA/D-DRA, are performed on a series of test problems created using the proposed generator. Experimental results indicate that all the three algorithms perform poorly on the new test problems. Meanwhile, a modified variant of MOEA/D-DRA, denoted as MOEA/D-DRA-UT, is validated to be more effective in dealing with these problems. Subsequently, it is concluded that the rational allocation of computational resources between different PF parts is crucial for MOEAs to handle the problems with DtA PF boundaries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据