Eckart Zitzler

Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach

Evolutionary algorithms (EAs) are often well-suited for optimization problems involving several, often conflicting objectives. Since 1985, various evolutionary approaches to multiobjective optimization have been developed that are capable of searching for multiple solutions concurrently in a single run. However, the few comparative studies of different methods presented up to now remain mostly qualitative and are often restricted to a few approaches. In this paper, four multiobjective EAs are compared quantitatively where an extended 0/1 knapsack problem is taken as a basis. Furthermore, we introduce a new evolutionary approach to multicriteria optimization, the strength Pareto EA (SPEA), that combines several features of previous multiobjective EAs in a unique manner. It is characterized by (a) storing nondominated solutions externally in a second, continuously updated population, (b) evaluating an individuals fitness dependent on the number of external nondominated points that dominate it, (c) preserving population diversity using the Pareto dominance relationship, and (d) incorporating a clustering procedure in order to reduce the nondominated set without destroying its characteristics. The proof-of-principle results obtained on two artificial problems as well as a larger problem, the synthesis of a digital hardware-software multiprocessor system, suggest that SPEA can be very effective in sampling from along the entire Pareto-optimal front and distributing the generated solutions over the tradeoff surface. Moreover, SPEA clearly outperforms the other four multiobjective EAs on the 0/1 knapsack problem.

Comparison of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Empirical Results

In this paper, we provide a systematic comparison of various evolutionary approaches to multiobjective optimization using six carefully chosen test functions. Each test function involves a particular feature that is known to cause difficulty in the evolutionary optimization process, mainly in converging to the Pareto-optimal front (e.g., multimodality and deception). By investigating these different problem features separately, it is possible to predict the kind of problems to which a certain technique is or is not well suited. However, in contrast to what was suspected beforehand, the experimental results indicate a hierarchy of the algorithms under consideration. Furthermore, the emerging effects are evidence that the suggested test functions provide sufficient complexity to compare multiobjective optimizers. Finally, elitism is shown to be an important factor for improving evolutionary multiobjective search.

Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review

An important issue in multiobjective optimization is the quantitative comparison of the performance of different algorithms. In the case of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms, the outcome is usually an approximation of the Pareto-optimal set, which is denoted as an approximation set, and therefore the question arises of how to evaluate the quality of approximation sets. Most popular are methods that assign each approximation set a vector of real numbers that reflect different aspects of the quality. Sometimes, pairs of approximation sets are also considered. In this study, we provide a rigorous analysis of the limitations underlying this type of quality assessment. To this end, a mathematical framework is developed which allows one to classify and discuss existing techniques.

Multiobjective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms - A Comparative Case Study

Since 1985 various evolutionary approaches to multiobjective optimization have been developed, capable of searching for multiple solutions concurrently in a single run. But the few comparative studies of different methods available to date are mostly qualitative and restricted to two approaches. In this paper an extensive, quantitative comparison is presented, applying four multiobjective evolutionary algorithms to an extended 0/1 knapsack problem.

Indicator-Based Selection in Multiobjective Search

This paper discusses how preference information of the decision maker can in general be integrated into multiobjective search. The main idea is to first define the optimization goal in terms of a binary performance measure (indicator) and then to directly use this measure in the selection process. To this end, we propose a general indicator-based evolutionary algorithm (IBEA) that can be combined with arbitrary indicators. In contrast to existing algorithms, IBEA can be adapted to the preferences of the user and moreover does not require any additional diversity preservation mechanism such as fitness sharing to be used. It is shown on several continuous and discrete benchmark problems that IBEA can substantially improve on the results generated by two popular algorithms, namely NSGA-II and SPEA2, with respect to different performance measures.

Scalable multi-objective optimization test problems

After adequately demonstrating the ability to solve different two-objective optimization problems, multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) must show their efficacy in handling problems having more than two objectives. In this paper, we suggest three different approaches for systematically designing test problems for this purpose. The simplicity of construction, scalability to any number of decision variables and objectives, knowledge of exact shape and location of the resulting Pareto-optimal front, and ability to control difficulties in both converging to the true Pareto-optimal front and maintaining a widely distributed set of solutions are the main features of the suggested test problems. Because of these features, they should be useful in various research activities on MOEAs, such as testing the performance of a new MOEA, comparing different MOEAs, and having a better understanding of the working principles of MOEAs.

Combining convergence and diversity in evolutionary multiobjective optimization

Over the past few years, the research on evolutionary algorithms has demonstrated their niche in solving multiobjective optimization problems, where the goal is to find a number of Pareto-optimal solutions in a single simulation run. Many studies have depicted different ways evolutionary algorithms can progress towards the Pareto-optimal set with a widely spread distribution of solutions. However, none of the multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) has a proof of convergence to the true Pareto-optimal solutions with a wide diversity among the solutions. In this paper, we discuss why a number of earlier MOEAs do not have such properties. Based on the concept of -dominance, new archiving strategies are proposed that overcome this fundamental problem and provably lead to MOEAs that have both the desired convergence and distribution properties. A number of modifications to the baseline algorithm are also suggested. The concept of -dominance introduced in this paper is practical and should make the proposed algorithms useful to researchers and practitioners alike.

A systematic comparison and evaluation of biclustering methods for gene expression data

MOTIVATION In recent years, there have been various efforts to overcome the limitations of standard clustering approaches for the analysis of gene expression data by grouping genes and samples simultaneously. The underlying concept, which is often referred to as biclustering, allows to identify sets of genes sharing compatible expression patterns across subsets of samples, and its usefulness has been demonstrated for different organisms and datasets. Several biclustering methods have been proposed in the literature; however, it is not clear how the different techniques compare with each other with respect to the biological relevance of the clusters as well as with other characteristics such as robustness and sensitivity to noise. Accordingly, no guidelines concerning the choice of the biclustering method are currently available. RESULTS First, this paper provides a methodology for comparing and validating biclustering methods that includes a simple binary reference model. Although this model captures the essential features of most biclustering approaches, it is still simple enough to exactly determine all optimal groupings; to this end, we propose a fast divide-and-conquer algorithm (Bimax). Second, we evaluate the performance of five salient biclustering algorithms together with the reference model and a hierarchical clustering method on various synthetic and real datasets for Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Arabidopsis thaliana. The comparison reveals that (1) biclustering in general has advantages over a conventional hierarchical clustering approach, (2) there are considerable performance differences between the tested methods and (3) already the simple reference model delivers relevant patterns within all considered settings.

Hype: An algorithm for fast hypervolume-based many-objective optimization

In the field of evolutionary multi-criterion optimization, the hypervolume indicator is the only single set quality measure that is known to be strictly monotonic with regard to Pareto dominance: whenever a Pareto set approximation entirely dominates another one, then the indicator value of the dominant set will also be better. This property is of high interest and relevance for problems involving a large number of objective functions. However, the high computational effort required for hypervolume calculation has so far prevented the full exploitation of this indicators potential; current hypervolume-based search algorithms are limited to problems with only a few objectives. This paper addresses this issue and proposes a fast search algorithm that uses Monte Carlo simulation to approximate the exact hypervolume values. The main idea is not that the actual indicator values are important, but rather that the rankings of solutions induced by the hypervolume indicator. In detail, we present HypE, a hypervolume estimation algorithm for multi-objective optimization, by which the accuracy of the estimates and the available computing resources can be traded off; thereby, not only do many-objective problems become feasible with hypervolume-based search, but also the runtime can be flexibly adapted. Moreover, we show how the same principle can be used to statistically compare the outcomes of different multi-objective optimizers with respect to the hypervolumeso far, statistical testing has been restricted to scenarios with few objectives. The experimental results indicate that HypE is highly effective for many-objective problems in comparison to existing multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. HypE is available for download at http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/sop/download/supplementary/hype/.

A Tutorial on Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization

Multiple, often conflicting objectives arise naturally in most real-world optimization scenarios. As evolutionary algorithms possess several characteristics that are desirable for this type of problem, this class of search strategies has been used for multiobjective optimization for more than a decade. Meanwhile evolutionary multiobjective optimization has become established as a separate subdiscipline combining the fields of evolutionary computation and classical multiple criteria decision making.