Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLi, M-
dc.contributor.authorYang, S-
dc.contributor.authorLiu, X-
dc.identifier.citationIEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, (2015)en_US
dc.description.abstractIt is known that Pareto dominance has its own weaknesses as the selection criterion in evolutionary multi-objective optimization. Algorithms based on Pareto dominance can suffer from slow convergence to the optimal front, inferior performance on problems with many objectives, etc. Non-Pareto criterion, such as decomposition-based criterion and indicator-based criterion, has already shown promising results in this regard, but its high selection pressure may lead the algorithm to prefer some specific areas of the problem’s Pareto front, especially when the front is highly irregular. In this paper, we propose a bi-criterion evolution framework of Pareto criterion and non-Pareto criterion, which attempts to make use of their strengths and compensates for each other’s weaknesses. The proposed framework consists of two parts, Pareto criterion evolution and non-Pareto criterion evolution. The two parts work collaboratively, with an abundant exchange of information to facilitate each other’s evolution. Specifically, the non-Pareto criterion evolution leads the Pareto criterion evolution forward and the Pareto criterion evolution compensates the possible diversity loss of the non-Pareto criterion evolution. The proposed framework keeps the freedom on the implementation of the non-Pareto criterion evolution part, thus making it applicable for any non-Pareto-based algorithm. In the Pareto criterion evolution, two operations, population maintenance and individual exploration, are presented. The former is to maintain a set of representative nondominated individuals, and the latter is to explore some promising areas which are undeveloped (or not well-developed) in the non-Pareto criterion evolution. Experimental results have shown the effectiveness of the proposed framework. The bi-criterion evolution works well on seven groups of 42 test problems with various characteristics, including those where Pareto-based algorithms or non-Paretobased algorithms strugg- e.en_US
dc.format.extent1 - 1-
dc.subjectEvolutionary multi-objective optimizationen_US
dc.subjectPareto criterionen_US
dc.subjectBi-criterion evolutionen_US
dc.subjectnon-Pareto criterionen_US
dc.titlePareto or non-Pareto: Bi-criterion evolution in multi-objective optimizationen_US
dc.contributor.sponsorThis work was supported in part by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) of U.K. under Grant EP/K001310/1, National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 71110107026 (Major International Joint Research Project) and Grant 61273031, and EPSRC Industrial Case under Grant 11220252.-
dc.relation.isPartOfIEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation-
Appears in Collections:Dept of Computer Science Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Fulltext.pdf2.65 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.