A comparative study of dynamic resampling strategies for guided Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization

In Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization many solutions have to be evaluated to provide the decision maker with a diverse choice of solutions along the Pareto-front, in particular for high-dimensional optimization problems. In Simulation-based Optimization the modeled systems are complex and require long simulation times. In addition the evaluated systems are often stochastic and reliable quality assessment of system configurations by resampling requires many simulation runs. As a countermeasure for the required high number of simulation runs caused by multiple optimization objectives the optimization can be focused on interesting parts of the Pareto-front, as it is done by the Reference point-guided NSGA-II algorithm (R-NSGA-II) [9]. The number of evaluations needed for the resampling of solutions can be reduced by intelligent resampling algorithms that allocate just as much sampling budget needed in different situations during the optimization run. In this paper we propose and compare resampling algorithms that support the R-NSGA-II algorithm on optimization problems with stochastic evaluation functions.

[1]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[2]  R. Lyndon While,et al.  Applying evolutionary algorithms to problems with noisy, time-consuming fitness functions , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE Cat. No.04TH8753).

[3]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Reference point based multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms , 2006, GECCO.

[4]  Loo Hay Lee,et al.  Efficient Simulation Budget Allocation for Selecting an Optimal Subset , 2008, INFORMS J. Comput..

[5]  A. Tsoularis,et al.  Analysis of logistic growth models. , 2002, Mathematical biosciences.

[6]  Robert Ivor John,et al.  Evolutionary optimisation of noisy multi-objective problems using confidence-based dynamic resampling , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[7]  Chun-Hung Chen,et al.  Simulation Budget Allocation for Further Enhancing the Efficiency of Ordinal Optimization , 2000, Discret. Event Dyn. Syst..

[8]  Loo Hay Lee,et al.  Stochastic Simulation Optimization - An Optimal Computing Budget Allocation , 2010, System Engineering and Operations Research.

[9]  Averill M. Law,et al.  Simulation Modeling and Analysis , 1982 .

[10]  Jrgen Branke EFFICIENT SAMPLING IN INTERACTIVE MULTI-CRITERIA SELECTION , 2007 .

[11]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach , 1999, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[12]  Thomas Bartz-Beielstein,et al.  Particle Swarm Optimization and Sequential Sampling in Noisy Environments , 2007, Metaheuristics.

[13]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Finding a preferred diverse set of Pareto-optimal solutions for a limited number of function calls , 2012, 2012 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[14]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  Scalable Test Problems for Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization , 2005, Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization.

[15]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Comparison of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Empirical Results , 2000, Evolutionary Computation.

[16]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Reference point-based evolutionary multi-objective optimization for industrial systems simulation , 2012, Proceedings Title: Proceedings of the 2012 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC).

[17]  L. Lee,et al.  Finding the non-dominated Pareto set for multi-objective simulation models , 2010 .

[18]  Loo Hay Lee,et al.  An improved simulation budget allocation procedure to efficiently select the optimal subset of many alternatives , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE).

[19]  Jürgen Branke,et al.  Sequential Sampling in Noisy Environments , 2004, PPSN.