Comparison of metamodeling techniques in evolutionary algorithms

Although researchers have successfully incorporated metamodels in evolutionary algorithms to solve computational-expensive optimization problems, they have scarcely performed comparisons among different metamodeling techniques. This paper presents an in-depth comparison study over four of the most popular metamodeling techniques: polynomial response surface, Kriging, radial basis function neural network (RBF), and support vector regression. We adopted six well-known scalable test functions and performed experiments to evaluate their suitability to be coupled with an evolutionary algorithm and the appropriateness to surrogate problems by regions (instead of surrogating the entire problem). Notwithstanding that most researchers have undertaken accuracy as the main measure to discern among metamodels, this paper shows that the precision, measured with the ranking preservation indicator, gives a more valuable information for selecting purposes. Additionally, nonetheless each model has its own peculiarities; our results concur that RBF fulfills most of our interests. Furthermore, the readers can also benefit from this study if their problem at hand has certain characteristics such as a low budget of computational time or a low-dimension problem since they can assess specific results of our experimentation.

[1]  E. Forgy Cluster analysis of multivariate data : efficiency versus interpretability of classifications , 1965 .

[2]  Roman Neruda,et al.  Aggregate meta-models for evolutionary multiobjective and many-objective optimization , 2013, Neurocomputing.

[3]  W. Carpenter,et al.  A comparison of polynomial approximations and artificial neural nets as response surfaces , 1993 .

[4]  Bernhard Sendhoff,et al.  Comparing neural networks and Kriging for fitness approximation in evolutionary optimization , 2003, The 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, 2003. CEC '03..

[5]  António Gaspar-Cunha,et al.  A Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm Using Neural Networks to Approximate Fitness Evaluations , 2005, Int. J. Comput. Syst. Signals.

[6]  Wei Shyy,et al.  Global Design Optimization for Aerodynamics and Rocket Propulsion Components , 2013 .

[7]  Kyriakos C. Giannakoglou,et al.  Multiobjective Metamodel–Assisted Memetic Algorithms , 2009 .

[8]  Kenneth Alan De Jong,et al.  An analysis of the behavior of a class of genetic adaptive systems. , 1975 .

[9]  T. W. Layne,et al.  A Comparison of Approximation Modeling Techniques: Polynomial Versus Interpolating Models , 1998 .

[10]  William H. Press,et al.  Numerical Recipes 3rd Edition: The Art of Scientific Computing , 2007 .

[11]  Thomas J. Santner,et al.  The Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments , 2003, Springer Series in Statistics.

[12]  Nikolaus Hansen,et al.  Completely Derandomized Self-Adaptation in Evolution Strategies , 2001, Evolutionary Computation.

[13]  Shiu Yin Yuen,et al.  An Evolutionary Algorithm That Makes Decision Based on the Entire Previous Search History , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[14]  M. D. McKay,et al.  A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code , 2000 .

[15]  Hans-Paul Schwefel,et al.  Numerical optimization of computer models , 1981 .

[16]  R. L. Hardy Multiquadric equations of topography and other irregular surfaces , 1971 .

[17]  T. Simpson,et al.  Comparative studies of metamodelling techniques under multiple modelling criteria , 2001 .

[18]  Vladimir Vapnik,et al.  Statistical learning theory , 1998 .

[19]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments , 1995 .

[20]  Thomas Bäck,et al.  Evolutionary Algorithms in Theory and Practice , 1996 .

[21]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  A ranking method based on the R2 indicator for many-objective optimization , 2013, 2013 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[22]  L. Schumaker Spline Functions: Basic Theory , 1981 .

[23]  Rainer Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces , 1997, J. Glob. Optim..

[24]  G. Matheron Principles of geostatistics , 1963 .

[25]  Shiu Yin Yuen,et al.  A Genetic Algorithm That Adaptively Mutates and Never Revisits , 2009, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[26]  Russell R. Barton,et al.  Metamodels for simulation input-output relations , 1992, WSC '92.

[27]  Wilfrido Gómez-Flores,et al.  On the selection of surrogate models in evolutionary optimization algorithms , 2011, 2011 IEEE Congress of Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[28]  Timothy M. Mauery,et al.  COMPARISON OF RESPONSE SURFACE AND KRIGING MODELS FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY DESIGN OPTIMIZATION , 1998 .

[29]  Tapabrata Ray,et al.  An Evolutionary Algorithm with Spatially Distributed Surrogates for Multiobjective Optimization , 2007, ACAL.