Three new metrics to measure the convergence of metaheuristics towards the Pareto frontier and the aesthetic of a set of solutions in biobjective optimization

Computers and Operations Research

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 773-792

  Collette, Y ^a,b   Siarry, P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS EST CRÉTEIL   (France)

^b EDF R AND D   (France)

Author keywords

Biobjective optimization; Metaheuristics; Multiobjective optimization; Performance measure

Indexed keywords

EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHMS; HEURISTIC METHODS; MATRIX ALGEBRA; OPTIMIZATION; PROBLEM SOLVING;

BIOBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION; METAHEURISTICS; MULTIOBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION; PERFORMANCE MEASURE;

OPERATIONS RESEARCH;

EID: 5644239895     PISSN: 03050548     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cor.2003.08.017     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Van Veldhuizen DA. Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: classifications, analyses, and new innovations. PhD thesis, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, USA, May 1999.
2. Miettinen K. Non-linear multiobjective optimization. 1999;Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht.
3. Sait S.M., Youssef H. Iterative computer algorithm with applications in engineering: solving combinatorial optimization. 1999;IEEE Computer Society Press, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
4. Deb K. Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. 2001;Wiley, NY, USA.
5. Schott JR. Fault tolerant design using single and multicriteria genetic algorithm optimization. MS thesis, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, May 1995.
6. Collette Y., Siarry P., Wong H.-.I. A systematic comparison of performances of various multiple objective metaheuristics using a common set of analytical test functions. Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences. 25:2000;249-271.
7. Zitzler E, Deb K, Thiele L. Comparison of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: empirical results. Technical Report, Computer Engineering and Networks Laboratory, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Gloriastrasse 35, CH-8092, Zurich, Switzlerland, December 1999.
8. Messac A., Sundararaj G.J., Tappeta R.V., Renaud J.E. Ability of objective functions to generate points on non-convex Pareto frontiers. AIAA Journal. 38(6):2000;1084-1091.
9. Das I., Dennis J. A closer look at drawbacks of minimizing weighted sums of objectives for Pareto set generation in multicriteria optimization problem. Structural Optimization. 14(1):1997;63-69.
10. Deb K, Goel T. Controlled Elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithms for better convergence. Technical Report, KanGAL Report no. 200004, 2000.
11. Keeney R.L., Raiffa H. Decision with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoff. 1993;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.