Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms which use non-dominated sorting and sharing have been mainly criticized for their (i) O(MN computational complexity (where M is the number of objectives and N is the population size), (ii) non-elitism approach, and (iii) the need for specifying a sharing parameter. In this paper, we suggest a non-dominated sorting based multi-objective evolutionary algorithm (we called it the Non-dominated Sorting GA-II or NSGA-II) which alleviates all the above three difficulties. Specifically, a fast non-dominated sorting approach with O(MN ) computational complexity is presented. Second, a selection operator is presented which creates a mating pool by combining the parent and child populations and selecting the best (with respect to fitness and spread) N solutions. Simulation results on a number of difficult test problems show that the proposed NSGA-II, in most problems, is able to find much better spread of solutions and better convergence near the true Pareto-optimal front compared to PAES and SPEA - two other elitist multi-objective EAs which pay special attention towards creating a diverse Pareto-optimal front. Moreover, we modify the definition of dominance in order to solve constrained multi-objective problems eciently. Simulation results of the constrained NSGA-II on a number of test problems, including a five-objective, seven-constraint non-linear problem, are compared with another constrained multi-objective optimizer and much better performance of NSGA-II is observed. Because of NSGA-II's low computational requirements, elitist approach, parameter-less niching approach, and simple constraint-handling strategy, NSGA-II should find increasing applications in the coming years.

Evolutionary algorithms (EAs) are often wellsuited for optimization problems involving several, often conflicting objectives. Since 1985, various evolutionary approaches to multiobjective optimization have been developed that are capable of searching for multiple solutions concurrently in a single run. However, the few comparative studies of different methods presented up to now remain mostly qualitative and are often restricted to a few approaches. In this paper, four multiobjective EAs are compared quantitatively where an extended 0/1 knapsack problem is taken as a basis. Furthermore, we introduce a new evolutionary approach to multicriteria optimization, the Strength Pareto EA (SPEA), that combines several features of previous multiobjective EAs in a unique manner. It is characterized by (a) storing nondominated solutions externally in a second, continuously updated population, (b) evaluating an individual's fitness dependent on the number of external nondominated points that domina...

Solving optimization problems with multiple (often conflicting) objectives is, generally, a very difficult goal. Evolutionary algorithms (EAs) were initially extended and applied during the mid-eighties in an attempt to stochastically solve problems of this generic class. During the past decade, a variety of multiobjective EA (MOEA) techniques have been proposed and applied to many scientific and engineering applications. Our discussion's intent is to rigorously define multiobjective optimization problems and certain related concepts, present an MOEA classification scheme, and evaluate the variety of contemporary MOEAs. Current MOEA theoretical developments are evaluated; specific topics addressed include fitness functions, Pareto ranking, niching, fitness sharing, mating restriction, and secondary populations. Since the development and application of MOEAs is a dynamic and rapidly growing activity, we focus on key analytical insights based upon critical MOEA evaluation of c...

Many real-world problems involve two types of problem difficulty: i) multiple, conflicting objectives and ii) a highly complex search space. On the one hand, instead of a single optimal solution competing goals give rise to a set of compromise solutions, generally denoted as Pareto-optimal. In the absence of preference information, none of the corresponding trade-offs can be said to be better than the others. On the other hand, the search space can be too large and too complex to be solved by exact methods. Thus, efficient optimization strategies are required that are able to deal with both difficulties. Evolutionary algorithms possess several characteristics that are desirable for this kind of problem and make them preferable to classical optimization methods. In fact, various evolutionary approaches to multiobjective optimization have been proposed since 1985, capable of searching for multiple Paretooptimal solutions concurrently in a single simulation run. However, in spite of this...

. This paper presents a critical review of the most important evolutionary-based multiobjective optimization techniques developed over the years, emphasizing the importance of analyzing their Operations Research roots as a way to motivate the development of new approaches that exploit the search capabilities of evolutionary algorithms. Each technique is briefly described mentioning its advantages and disadvantages, their degree of applicability and some of their known applications. Finally, the future trends in this discipline and some of the open areas of research are also addressed. Keywords: multiobjective optimization, multicriteria optimization, vector optimization, genetic algorithms, evolutionary algorithms, artificial intelligence. 1 Introduction Since the pioneer work of Rosenberg in the late 60s regarding the possibility of using genetic-based search to deal with multiple objectives, this new area of research (now called evolutionary multiobjective optimization) has grown c...

In this paper, we study the problem features that may cause a multi-objective genetic algorithm (GA) difficulty in converging to the true Pareto-optimal front. Identification of such features helps us develop difficult test problems for multi-objective optimization. Multi-objective test problems are constructed from single-objective optimization problems, thereby allowing known difficult features of single-objective problems (such as multi-modality, isolation, or deception) to be directly transferred to the corresponding multi-objective problem. In addition, test problems having features specific to multiobjective optimization are also constructed. More importantly, these difficult test problems will enable researchers to test their algorithms for specific aspects of multi-objective optimization. Keywords Genetic algorithms, multi-objective optimization, niching, pareto-optimality, problem difficulties, test problems. 1 Introduction After a decade since the pioneering wor...

this paper, we briefly outline the principles of multi-objective optimization. Thereafter, we discuss why classical search and optimization methods are not adequate for multi-criterion optimization by discussing the working of two popular methods. We then outline several evolutionary methods for handling multi-criterion optimization problems. Of them, we discuss one implementation (non-dominated sorting GA or NSGA [38]) in somewhat greater details. Thereafter, we demonstrate the working of the evolutionary methods by applying NSGA to three test problems having constraints and discontinuous Pareto-optimal region. We also show the efficacy of evolutionary algorithms in engineering design problems by solving a welded beam design problem. The results show that evolutionary methods can find widely different yet near-Pareto-optimal solutions in such problems. Based on the above studies, this paper also suggests a number of immediate future studies which would make this emerging field more mature and applicable in practice. 1.2 PRINCIPLES OF MULTI-CRITERION OPTIMIZATION

. This paper studies the influence of what are recognized as key issues

Abstract- A large number of methods for solving multiobjective optimisation (MOO) problems have been developed. To compare these methods rigorously, or to measure the performance of a particular MOO algorithm quantitatively, a variety of performance indices (PIs) have been proposed. This paper provides an overview of the various PIs and attempts to categorise them into a certain number of classes according to their properties. Comparative studies have been conducted using a group of artificial solution sets and a group of solution sets obtained by various MOO solvers to show the advantages and disadvantages of the PIs. The comparative studies show that many PIs may be misleading in that they fail to truly reflect the quality of solution sets. Thus, it may not be a good practice to evaluate the performance of MOO solvers based on PIs only. 1

Abstract. This article describes a set function that maps a set of Pareto optimal points to a scalar. A proof is presented that shows that the maximization of this scalar value constitutes the necessary and sufficient condition for the function’s arguments to be maximally diverse Pareto optimal solutions of a discrete, multi-objective, optimization problem. This scalar quantity, a hypervolume based on a Lebesgue measure, is therefore the best metric to assess the quality of multiobjective optimization algorithms. Moreover, it can be used as the objective function in simulated annealing (SA) to induce convergence in probability to the Pareto optima. An efficient algorithm for calculating this scalar and analysis of its complexity is presented. 1