Investigating the Effect of Parallelism in Decomposition Based Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithms

One of the main reasons for evolutionary multi-objective and many-objective optimization (EMO) algorithms to find and maintain multiple trade-off solutions is that their operators are capable of establishing an implicit search parallely to multiple regions of the search space. A recent direction in EMO algorithm development is to use decompositionbased methods which make a compromise on achieving the full advantage of the implicit parallelism aspect of evolutionary algorithms. In this paper, we investigate a specific decomposition-based algorithm, MOEA/DM2M, and investigate the effect of an user-controlled explicit parallelism method in its search operators. For this purpose, we apply a number of M2M variants on a number of standard many-objective test problems (DTLZ and WFG problems) and compare their performances with more implicitly parallel EMO algorithms – NSGA-III and MOEA/D. Results from our extensive study indicate that by relaxing the decomposition effect, thereby re-establishing parallel search within M2M operators, the performance of the resulting MOEA/D-M2M variants can be improved. Despite our study being restricted to a single EMO algorithm, it provides interesting insights to the working of EMO algorithms in solving many-objective optimization problems.

[1]  Xin Yao,et al.  A New Dominance Relation-Based Evolutionary Algorithm for Many-Objective Optimization , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[2]  Bernhard Sendhoff,et al.  A Reference Vector Guided Evolutionary Algorithm for Many-Objective Optimization , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[3]  Qingfu Zhang,et al.  An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Based on Dominance and Decomposition , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[4]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Using Reference-Point-Based Nondominated Sorting Approach, Part I: Solving Problems With Box Constraints , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer,et al.  High dimensional search-based software engineering: finding tradeoffs among 15 objectives for automating software refactoring using NSGA-III , 2014, GECCO.

[6]  Qingfu Zhang,et al.  Decomposition of a Multiobjective Optimization Problem Into a Number of Simple Multiobjective Subproblems , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  Qingfu Zhang,et al.  Multiobjective Optimization Problems With Complicated Pareto Sets, MOEA/D and NSGA-II , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[8]  Qingfu Zhang,et al.  MOEA/D: A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Decomposition , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[9]  Nicola Beume,et al.  Pareto-, Aggregation-, and Indicator-Based Methods in Many-Objective Optimization , 2007, EMO.

[10]  R. Lyndon While,et al.  A review of multiobjective test problems and a scalable test problem toolkit , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

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

[12]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review , 2003, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

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

[14]  Martin J. Oates,et al.  PESA-II: region-based selection in evolutionary multiobjective optimization , 2001 .

[15]  H. Kita,et al.  Failure of Pareto-based MOEAs: does non-dominated really mean near to optimal? , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE Cat. No.01TH8546).

[16]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  SPEA2: Improving the strength pareto evolutionary algorithm , 2001 .

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

[18]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Nonlinear multiobjective optimization , 1998, International series in operations research and management science.

[19]  Hisao Ishibuchi,et al.  A multi-objective genetic local search algorithm and its application to flowshop scheduling , 1998, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C.

[20]  John E. Dennis,et al.  Normal-Boundary Intersection: A New Method for Generating the Pareto Surface in Nonlinear Multicriteria Optimization Problems , 1998, SIAM J. Optim..

[21]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Simulated Binary Crossover for Continuous Search Space , 1995, Complex Syst..

[22]  J. D. Schaffer,et al.  Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms , 1985, ICGA.