Multi-objective imperialistic competitive algorithm with multiple non-dominated sets for the solution of global optimization problems
- 130 Downloads
In this paper, we propose a multi-objective imperialistic competitive algorithm (MOICA) for solving global multi-objective optimization problems. The MOICA is a modified and improved multi-objective version of the single-objective imperialistic competitive algorithm previously proposed by Atashpaz-Gargari and Lucas (IEEE Congr Evolut Comput 7:4661–4666. doi: 10.1109/CEC.2007.4425083, 2007). The presented algorithm utilizes the metaphor of imperialism to solve optimization problems. Accordingly, the individuals in a population are referred to as countries, of which there are two types—colonies and imperialists. The MOICA incorporates competition between empires and their colonies for the solution of multi-objective problems. To this end, it employs several non-dominated solution sets, whereby each set is referred to as a local non-dominated solution (LNDS) set. All imperialists in an empire are considered non-dominated solutions, whereas all colonies are considered dominated solutions. In addition to LNDS sets, there is one global non-dominated solution (GNDS) set, which is created from the LNDS sets of all empires. There are two primary operators in the proposed algorithm, i.e., assimilation and revolution, which use the GNDS and LNDS sets, respectively. The significance of this study lies in a notable feature of the proposed algorithm, which is that no special parameter is used for diversity preservation. This enables the algorithm to prevent extra computation to maintain the spread of solutions. Simulations and experimental results on multi-objective benchmark problems show that the MOICA is more efficient compared to a few existing major multi-objective optimization algorithms because it produces better results for several test problems.
KeywordsMulti-objective metaheuristics Imperialistic competitive algorithm Multiple non-dominated sets Global optimization
This study was funded by Eastern Mediterranean University (02).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Fonseca CM, Fleming PJ (1993) Genetic algorithms for multiobjective optimization: formulation, discussion and generalization. In: Forrest S (ed) Proceedings of the 5th international conference on genetic algorithms. Morgan Kauffman Publishers, San Mateo, CA, pp 416–423Google Scholar
- Goudarzi M, Vahidi B, Naghizadeh RA (2013) Optimum reactive power compensation in distribution networks using imperialistic competitive algorithm. Sci Int (Lahore) 25(1):27–31Google Scholar
- Horn J, Nafploitis N, Goldberg DE (1994) A niched Pareto genetic algorithm for multiobjective optimization. In: Michalewicz Z (ed) Proceedings of the 1st IEEE conference on evolution computer. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, pp 82–87Google Scholar
- Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on neural network IV 1942–1948Google Scholar
- Kursawe F (1990) A variant of evolution strategies for vector optimization. In: Schwefel H-P, Manner R (eds) Parallel problem solving from nature. Springer, Berlin, pp 193–197Google Scholar
- Schaffer JD (1987) Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In: Grefensttete JJ (ed) Proceedings of the 1st international conference on genetic algorithms. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 93–100Google Scholar
- Sherinov Z, Unveren A, Acan A (2011) An evolutionary multi-objective modeling and solution approach for fuzzy vehicle routing problem. In: International symposium on innovations in intelligent systems and applications (INISTA), pp 450–454. doi: 10.1109/INISTA.2011.5946143
- Van Veldhuizen DA, Lamont GB (1998) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithm research: a history and analysis. Technical Report TR-98-03, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT), Wright-Patterson AFB, OHGoogle Scholar
- Vedadi M, Vahidi B, Hosseinian SH (2015) An imperialist competitive algorithm maximum power point tracker for photovoltaic string operating under partially shaded conditions. Sci Int (Lahore) 27(5):4023–4033Google Scholar
- Zhang Q, Zhou A, Zhao S, Suganthan PN, Liu W, Tiwari S (2009) Multiobjective optimization test instances for the CEC 2009 special session and competition. Technical Report CES-487, University of Essex, Essex, UKGoogle Scholar
- Zitzler E, Thiele L (1998) Multiobjective optimization using evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study. In: Eiben AE, Bäck T, Shoenauer M, Schwefel HP (eds) Parallel problem solving from nature. Springer, Berlin, pp 292–301Google Scholar