Self-adaptive Differential Evolution Based Multi-objective Optimization Incorporating Local Search and Indicator-Based Selection
As an efficient and effective evolutionary algorithm, Differential evolution (DE) has received ever-increasing attention over recent years. However, how to make DE suitable for multi-objective optimization is still worth further studying. Moreover, various means from different perspectives are promising to promote the performance of the algorithm. In this study, we propose a novel multi-objective evolutionary algorithm, ILSDEMO, which incorporates indicator-based selection and local search with a self-adaptive DE. In this algorithm, we also use orthogonal design to initialize the population. In addition, the k-nearest neighbor rule is employed to eliminate the most crowded solution while a new solution is ready to join the archive population. The performance of ILSDEMO is investigated on three test instances in terms of three indicators. Compared with NSGAII, IBEA, and DEMO, the results indicate that ILSDEMO can approximate the true Pareto front more accurately and evenly.
Keywordsmulti-objective optimization self-adaptive differential evolution orthogonal design indicator-based selection local search k-nearest neighbor
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Knowles, J.D.: Local-Search and Hybrid Evolutionary Algorithm for Pareto Optimization. Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Computer Science, University of Reading, Berkshire (2002)Google Scholar
- 2.Storn, R., Price, K.: Differential Evolution–A Simple and Efficient Adaptive Scheme for Global Optimization over Continuous Spaces. Tech. Rep. TR-95-012, Berkeley, pp. 1–12 (1995)Google Scholar
- 4.Mezura-Montes, E., Velázquez-Reyes, J., Coello, C.A.: A Comparative Study of Differential Evolution Variants for Global Optimization. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO 2006), Seattle, pp. 485–492 (2006)Google Scholar
- 7.Zitzler, E., Künzli, S.: Indicator-Based Selection in Multiobjective Search. In: Yao, X., Burke, E.K., Lozano, J.A., Smith, J., Merelo-Guervós, J.J., Bullinaria, J.A., Rowe, J.E., Tiňo, P., Kabán, A., Schwefel, H.-P. (eds.) PPSN 2004. LNCS, vol. 3242, pp. 832–842. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Sindhya, K., Sinha, A., Deb, K., Miettinen, K.: Local Search Based Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization Algorithm for Constrained and Unconstrained Problems. In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2009), Trondheim, pp. 2919–2926. IEEE Press (2009)Google Scholar
- 12.Tinos, R., Yang, S.X.: Self-Adaptation of Mutation Distribution in Evolutionary Algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2007), Singapore, pp. 79–86 (2007)Google Scholar
- 14.Zitzler, E.: Evolutionary Algorithms for Multi-objective Optimization: Methods and Applications. PhD Thesis, ETH Zurich (1999)Google Scholar
- 15.Veldhuizen, D.A.: Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Classifications, Analyses, and New Innovations. Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio (1999)Google Scholar