Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm for Optimization of Combustion Processes

  • Dirk Büche
  • Peter Stoll
  • Petros Koumoutsakos
Part of the International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 439)


This work introduces a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm capable of handling noisy problems like experimental setups with a particular emphasis on robustness against unexpected measurements (outliers). The algorithm is based on the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm (SPEA) of Zitzler and Thiele and includes the new concepts of domination dependent lifetime, re-evaluation of solutions and modifications in the update of the archive. Several tests on prototypical functions underline the improvements in convergence speed and robustness of the extended algorithm. The proposed algorithm is implemented to the Pareto optimization of the combustion process of a stationary gas turbine in an industrial setup. The free parameters of the optimization are the fuel injection rates through transverse jets. The Pareto front is constructed for the objectives of minimization of NO x emissions and reduction of the pressure fluctuations (pulsation) of the flame. Both objectives are conflicting affecting the environment and the lifetime of the turbine, respectively. The optimization leads a Pareto front corresponding to reduced emissions and pulsation of the burner. The physical implications of the solutions are discussed and the algorithm is evaluated.


Pareto Front Injection Hole Nondominated Solution Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Horn, J.: Multicriterion decision making In Bäck, T., Fogel, B., D., Michalewicz, Z., Eds.: Handbook of Evolutionary Computation, Sec. F1.9: pp. 1–15. (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zitzler, E., Thiele, L.: Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: A comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 3 (1999) 257–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Van Veldhuizen, D.A., Lamont, G.B.: On measuring multiobjective evolutionary algorithm performance. In: Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. (2000) 204–211Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coello Coello, C.A.: An updated survey of evolutionary multiobjective optimization techniques: State of the art and future trends. In: Congress on Evolutionary Computation. (1999) 3–13Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coello Coello, C.A.: List of references on evolutionary multi-objective optimization, (, Last accessed July 2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Teich, J.: Pareto-front exploration with uncertain objectives. In et al., Z., ed.: Proceedings of the First Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization. (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hughes, E.J.: Evolutionary multi-objective ranking with uncertainty and noise. In et al., Z., ed.: Proceedings of the First Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization. (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goldberg, D.E.: Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company (1989)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fonseca, M.C., Fleming, P.J.: Multi-objective genetic algorithms made easy: Selection, sharing and mating restrictions. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Genetic Algorithms in Engineering Systems: Innovations and Application. (1995) 45–52Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pareto, V.: Manuale die Economia Politica. Societa Editrice Libraria, Milano, Italy (1906)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goldberg, D.E., Segrest, P.: Finite Markov chain analysis of genetic algorithms. In Grafenstette, ed.: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Genetic Algorithms. (1987)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zitzler, E., Deb, K., Thiele, L., Coello Coello, C.A., Corne, D.W.: Proceedings of the First Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization. Springer-Verlag (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Van Veldhuizen, D.A., Lamont, G.B.: Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms. Analyzing state-of-the-art. Evolutionary Computation 8 (2000) 125–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miller, B.L., Goldberg, D.E.: Genetic algorithms, selection schemes, and the varying effects of noise. Illigal report no. 95005, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois Genetic Algorithm Laboratory (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bäck, T., Hoffmeister, F., Schwefel, H.P.: A survey of evolution strategies. In Belew, R.K., ed.: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and their Applications. (1991)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Deb, K.: Multi-objective genetic algorithms: Problem difficulties and construction of test problems. Evolutionary Computation 7 (1999) 205–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dirk Büche
    • 1
  • Peter Stoll
    • 2
  • Petros Koumoutsakos
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Computational ScienceSwiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH)ZürichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Alstom (Switzerland) AGSegelhofDättwilSwitzerland
  3. 3.NASA Ames Research CenterMoffett FieldUSA

Personalised recommendations