Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Soft Computing
Published in: Soft Computing 7/2016

24-04-2015 | Methodologies and Application

Preference representation using Gaussian functions on a hyperplane in evolutionary multi-objective optimization

Authors: Kaname Narukawa, Yu Setoguchi, Yuki Tanigaki, Markus Olhofer, Bernhard Sendhoff, Hisao Ishibuchi

Published in: Soft Computing | Issue 7/2016

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Many-objective optimization has attracted much attention in evolutionary multi-objective optimization (EMO). This is because EMO algorithms developed so far often degrade their search ability for optimization problems with four or more objectives, which are frequently referred to as many-objective problems. One of promising approaches to handle many objectives is to incorporate the preference of a decision maker (DM) into EMO algorithms. With the preference, EMO algorithms can focus the search on regions preferred by the DM, resulting in solutions close to the Pareto front around the preferred regions. Although a number of preference-based EMO algorithms have been proposed, it is not trivial for the DM to reflect his/her actual preference in the search. We previously proposed to represent the preference of the DM using Gaussian functions on a hyperplane. The DM specifies the center and spread vectors of the Gaussian functions so as to represent his/her preference. The preference handling is integrated into the framework of NSGA-II. This paper extends our previous work so that obtained solutions follow the distribution of Gaussian functions specified. The performance of our proposed method is demonstrated mainly for benchmark problems and real-world applications with a few objectives in this paper. We also show the applicability of our method to many-objective problems.
previous article A two-stage linear goal programming approach to eliciting interval weights from additive interval fuzzy preference relations
next article A soft image representation approach by exploiting local neighborhood structure of self-organizing map (SOM)

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Footnotes
1
It should be noted that optimization problems with more than three objectives are called many-objective problems in this paper as there is no clear definition on the terminology in the literature.
 
2
For maximization problems, the following conditions must be satisfied for \(\mathbf{a}\) dominating \(\mathbf{b}\). \(\forall i: f_i(\mathbf{a}) \ge f_i(\mathbf{b})\ \mathrm {and\ } \exists j: f_j(\mathbf{a}) > f_j(\mathbf{b}).\)
 
3
A solution is weakly Pareto optimal if there does not exist any other solutions for which all the objective functions are better (Miettinen 1999).
 
4
R-NSGA-II allows only one solution to exist within a distance of \(\epsilon \) in the objective space.
 
5
The total number of DTLZ problems depends on which paper to be referred to. For example, Deb et al. (2001) has nine DTLZ problems whereas Deb et al. (2002) has seven DTLZ problems in which DTLZ5 and DTLZ9 in Deb et al. (2001) are removed, and DTLZ6, DTLZ7, DTLZ8 in Deb et al. (2001) are described as DTLZ5, DTLZ6, DTLZ7, respectively. This paper uses the first seven DTLZ problems in Deb et al. (2001).
 
6
The nadir vector is defined as a vector consisting of the worst value of each objective on the Pareto front.
 
7
Larger values at the \(i\)th element in \(\mathbf{u}\) indicate that the \(i\)th objective is preferred higher.
 
8
For maximization problems, the normalized \(\mathbf{u}\) is directly used as a center vector of Gaussian functions in P-NSGA-II. On the other hand, each element in \(\mathbf{u}\) is inversed and the normalized vector is used as the center vector for minimization problems.
 
Literature
Allmendinger R, Knowles J (2013) Hang on a minute: Investigations on the effects of delayed objective functions in multiobjective optimization. In: Purshouse R, Fleming P, Fonseca C, Greco S, Shaw J (eds) Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization: EMO 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7811, pp 6–20. Springer
Auger A, Bader J, Brockhoff D, Zitzler E (2009) Articulating user preferences in many-objective problems by sampling the weighted hypervolume. In: Proc. of 2009 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pp 555–562. ACM
Beume N, Naujoks B, Emmerich M (2007) SMS-EMOA: multiobjective selection based on dominated hypervolume. Eur J Oper Res 181(3):1653–1669CrossRefMATH
Branke J, Deb K, Dierolf H, Osswald M (2004) Finding knees in multi-objective optimization. In: Parallel Problem Solving from Nature-PPSN VIII, pp 722–731. Springer
Branke J, Deb K, Miettinen K, Slowinski R (2008) Multiobjective optimization: interactive and evolutionary approaches. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Chankong V, Haimes Y (1983) Multiobjective decision making: theory and methodology. Dover Publications, North-Holland, Amsterdam
Coello C (2000) Handling preferences in evolutionary multiobjective optimization: a survey. In: Proceedings of 2000 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp 30–37. IEEE
Coello C, Lamont G, Van Veldhuizen D (2007) Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-objective problems. Genetic and evolutionary computation. Springer, US
Deb K (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Wiley, Chichester, England
Deb K, Jain H (2013) An evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm using reference-point based non-dominated sorting approach, part I: solving problems with box constraints. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 18(4):577–601CrossRef
Deb K, Kumar A (2007) Light beam search based multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of 2007 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp 2125–2132. IEEE
Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197CrossRef
Deb K, Sundar J, Udaya Bhaskara Rao N, Chaudhuri S (2006) Reference point based multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Int J Comput Intell Res 2(3):273–286MathSciNet
Deb K, Thiele L, Laumanns M, Zitzler E (2001) Scalable test problems for evolutionary multi-objective optimization. Tech. Rep. 2001001, Kanpur Genetic Algorithms Laboratory (KanGAL), Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur
Deb K, Thiele L, Laumanns M, Zitzler E (2002) Scalable multi-objective optimization test problems. In: Proceedings of 2002 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (World Congress on Computational Intelligence), pp 825–830. IEEE
Deb K, Thiele L, Laumanns M, Zitzler E (2005) Scalable test problems for evolutionary multiobjective optimization. In: Abraham A, Jain L, Goldberg R (eds) Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization: Theoretical Advances and Applications, Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing, pp 105–145. Springer
Haimes Y, Ladson L, Wismer D (1971) On a bicriterion formulation of the problems of integrated system identification and system optimization. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 1(3):296–297MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
Handl J, Knowles J (2013) Evidence accumulation in multiobjective data clustering. In: Purshouse R, Fleming P, Fonseca C, Greco S, Shaw J (eds) Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization: EMO 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7811, pp 543–557. Springer (2013)
Ishibuchi H, Narukawa K (2005) Comparison of evolutionary multiobjective optimization with reference solution-based single-objective approach. In: Proceedings of 2005 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pp 787–794. ACM
Ishibuchi H, Tsukamoto N, Nojima Y (2008) Evolutionary many-objective optimization: a short review. In: Proceedings of 2008 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (World Congress on Computational Intelligence), pp 2419–2426. IEEE
Ishibuchi H, Tsukamoto N, Sakane Y, Nojima Y (2010) Indicator-based evolutionary algorithm with hypervolume approximation by achievement scalarizing functions. In: Proceedings of 2010 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pp 527–534. ACM
Jaszkiewicz A, Słowiński R (1999) The light beam search approach: an overview of methodology and applications. Eur J Oper Res 113(2):300–314CrossRefMATH
Knowles J, Corne D (2000) Approximating the nondominated front using the Pareto archived evolution strategy. Evol Comput 8(2):149–172CrossRef
Korhonen P, Wallenius J (2008) Visualization in the multiple objective decision-making framework. In: Multiobjective optimization, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5252, pp 195–212. Springer
Lotov A, Miettinen K (2008) Visualizing the Pareto frontier. In: Multiobjective optimization, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5252, pp 213–243. Springer
Miettinen K (1999) Nonlinear multiobjective optimization. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Massachusetts, USA
Molina J, Santana L, Hernández-Díaz A, Coello C, Caballero R (2009) g-Dominance: reference point based dominance for multiobjective metaheuristics. Eur J Oper Res 197(2):685–692CrossRefMATH
Morino H, Obayashi S (2013) Knowledge extraction for structural design of regional jet horizontal tail using multi-objective design exploration (MODE). In: Purshouse R, Fleming P, Fonseca C, Greco S, Shaw J (eds) Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization: EMO 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7811, pp 656–668. Springer
Narukawa K (2013) Effect of dominance balance in many-objective optimization. In: Purshouse R, Fleming P, Fonseca C, Greco S, Shaw J (eds) Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization: EMO 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7811, pp 276–290. Springer
Narukawa K, Rodemann T (2012) Examining the performance of evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithms on a real-world application. In: Proceedings of 2012 IEEE International Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computing, pp 316–319. IEEE
Narukawa K, Tanigaki Y, Ishibuchi H (2014) Evolutionary many-objective optimization using preference on hyperplane. In: Proceedings of 2014 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pp 91–92. ACM
Okabe T, Jin Y, Sendhoff B (2003) A critical survey of performance indices for multi-objective optimisation. In: Proc. of 2003 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, IEEE, vol 2, pp 878–885
Pedro L, Takahashi R (2011) Modeling decision-maker preferences through utility function level sets. In: Takahashi R, Deb K, Wanner E, Greco S (eds) Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization: EMO 2011, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6576, pp 550–563. Springer
Pedro L, Takahashi, R (2013) Decision-maker preference modeling in interactive multiobjective optimization. In: Purshouse R, Fleming P, Fonseca C, Greco S, Shaw J (eds) evolutionary multi-criterion optimization: EMO 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7811, pp 811–824. Springer
Rachmawati L, Srinivasan D (2009) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithm with controllable focus on the knees of the pareto front. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 13(4):810–824CrossRef
Sato H, Aguirre H, Tanaka K (2007) Controlling dominance area of solutions and its impact on the performance of MOEAs. In: Obayashi S, Deb K, Poloni C, Hiroyasu T, Murata T (eds) Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization: EMO 2007, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4403, pp 5–20. Springer
Tanigaki Y, Narukawa K, Nojima Y, Ishibuchi H (2014) Preference-based NSGA-II for many-objective knapsack problems. In: Proceedings of Joint 7th International Conference on Soft Computing and Intelligent Systems and 15th International Symposium on Advanced Intelligent Systems. IEEE
Wagner T, Beume N, Naujoks B (2007) Pareto-, aggregation-, and indicator-based methods in many-objective optimization. In: Obayashi S, Deb K, Poloni C, Hiroyasu T, Murata T (eds) evolutionary multi-criterion optimization: EMO 2007, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4403, pp 742–756. Springer
Wang Y, Yang Y (2009) Particle swarm optimization with preference order ranking for multi-objective optimization. Inf Sci 179(12):1944–1959MathSciNetCrossRef
Wickramasinghe U, Li X (2008) Integrating user preferences with particle swarms for multi-objective optimization. In: Proceedings of 2008 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pp 745–752. ACM
Wickramasinghe U, Li X (2009) A distance metric for evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithms using user-preferences. In: AI 2009: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, pp 443–453. Springer
Woźniak P (2011) Preferences in multi-objective evolutionary optimisation of electric motor speed control with hardware in the loop. Appl Soft Comput 11(1):49–55CrossRef
Zhang Q, Li H (2007) MOEA/D: a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 11(6):712–731CrossRef
Zitzler E, Künzli S (2004) Indicator-based selection in multiobjective search. In: Yao X, Burke E, Lozano J, Smith J, Guervós J, Bullinaria J, Rowe J, Tiño P, Kabán A, Schwefel H (eds) Parallel problem solving from nature: PPSN VIII, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3242, pp 832–842. Springer
Zitzler E, Laumanns M, Thiele L (2001) SPEA2: Improving the strength pareto evolutionary algorithm for multiobjective optimization. In: Proc. of Evolutionary Methods for Design, Optimisation and Control with Application to Industrial Problems, pp 95–100
Zitzler E, Thiele L (1999) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3(4):257–271CrossRef
Zitzler E, Thiele L, Laumanns M, Fonseca C, Fonseca V (2003) Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 7(2):117–132CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Preference representation using Gaussian functions on a hyperplane in evolutionary multi-objective optimization
Authors
Kaname Narukawa
Yu Setoguchi
Yuki Tanigaki
Markus Olhofer
Bernhard Sendhoff
Hisao Ishibuchi
Publication date
24-04-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Soft Computing / Issue 7/2016
Print ISSN: 1432-7643
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7479
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-015-1674-9

Other articles of this Issue 7/2016

Soft Computing 7/2016 Go to the issue

Methodologies and Application

Using multi-objective metaheuristics for the optimal selection of positioning systems

Methodologies and Application

Chaotic feature analysis and forecasting of Liujiang River runoff

Methodologies and Application

A two-stage linear goal programming approach to eliciting interval weights from additive interval fuzzy preference relations

Foundations

On pseudo-fractional integral inequalities related to Hermite–Hadamard type

Methodologies and Application

Multiple attribute group decision-making methods based on trapezoidal fuzzy two-dimension linguistic power generalized aggregation operators

Foundations

On a topological universe of L-bornological spaces

Premium Partner

    Image Credits