Examining the Performance of Three Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms Based on Benchmarking Problems

Authors: Konstantinos Metaxiotis, Konstantinos Liagkouras

Abstract:

The objective of this study is to examine the performance of three well-known multiobjective evolutionary algorithms for solving optimization problems. The first algorithm is the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm-II (NSGA-II), the second one is the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm 2 (SPEA-2), and the third one is the Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms based on decomposition (MOEA/D). The examined multiobjective algorithms are analyzed and tested on the ZDT set of test functions by three performance metrics. The results indicate that the NSGA-II performs better than the other two algorithms based on three performance metrics.

Keywords: MOEAs, Multiobjective optimization, ZDT test functions, performance metrics.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1130623

References:

[1] K. Metaxiotis & K. Liagkouras (2012) Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms for Portfolio Management: A comprehensive literature review. Expert Systems with Applications, Elsevier, 39 (14): 11685-1169.
[2] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2014) A new Probe Guided Mutation Operator and its application for solving the Cardinality Constrained Portfolio Optimization Problem. Expert Systems with Applications, Elsevier, 41 (14), 6274-6290.
[3] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2015) Efficient Portfolio Construction with the Use of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Best Practices and Performance Metrics, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 14 (03), 535-564, World Scientific.
[4] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2015) An experimental analysis of a new two-stage crossover operator for multiobjective optimization, Soft Computing, pp. 1-31, Springer DOI: 10.1007/s00500-015-1810-6.
[5] J. D. Schaffer, “Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms,” In J. J. Grefenstette, editor, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pp.93-100. Lawrence Earlbaum, 1991.
[6] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2015) An Experimental Analysis of a New Interval-Based Mutation Operator, International Journal of Computational Intelligence and Applications 14 (3) 1550018, World Scientific.
[7] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2016) A new Probe Guided Mutation Operator for more Efficient Exploration of the search space: An Experimental Analysis, International Journal of Operational Research, 25 (2), 212-251, Inderscience.
[8] K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, T. Meyarivan (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. Evol Comput IEEE Trans 6(2):182–197.
[9] K. Deb and R. B. Agrawal, "Simulated binary crossover for continuous search space", Complex Systems, 1995.
[10] E. Zitzler, & L. Thiele (1999). Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: A Comparative Case Study and the Strength Pareto Approach. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 3 (4), 257–271.
[11] E. Zitzler, M. Laumanns, and L. Thiele, (2001) SPEA2: Improving the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm, Computer Engineering and Networks Laboratory (TIK) Department of Electrical Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, 2001.
[12] Q. Zhang and H. Li: MOEA/D: A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Decomposition. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 11 (2007) 712-731.
[13] Q. Zhang, W. Liu, and H. Li: The Performance of a New Version of MOEA/D on CEC09 Unconstrained MOP Test Instances." IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation,Trondheim, Norway, (2009).
[14] M. Laumanns, E. Zitzler and L. Thiele (2000). A unified model for multiobjective evolutionary algorithms with elitism. in Proc. Congr. Evol. Comput. 1: 46–53.
[15] D.A.V. Veldhuizen and G.B. Lamont (1998). Multiobjective evolutionary algorithm research: A history and analysis. Technical Report TR-98-03, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, AFB, OH: Wright-Patterson.
[16] E. Zitzler, L. Thiele, M. Laumanns, CM Fonseca and VG Da Fonseca (2003). Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: An analysis and review. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 7(2): 117–132.
[17] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2016) Enhancing the performance of MOEAs: An experimental presentation of a new Fitness Guided Mutation Operator, Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, Taylor & Francis, DOI: 10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132260.
[18] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2016) A new Efficiently Encoded Multiobjective Algorithm for the Solution of the Constrained Portfolio Optimization Problem, Annals of Operations Research, Springer. doi:10.1007/s10479-016-2377-z.
[19] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2015) A new Two Stage Crossover Operator and its application for solving the Cardinality Constrained Portfolio Selection Problem, “Multiple Criteria Decision Making in Finance, Insurance and Investment”, Springer, edited by Minwir Al-Shammari and Hatem Masri DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-21158-9_8.
[20] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2016) A Probe Guided Crossover operator for more Efficient Exploration of the Search Space, Springer, Studies in Computational Intelligence series, “Advances in Knowledge Engineering: Paradigms and Applications”, Springer, Studies in Computational Intelligence series, edited by George A. Tsihrintzis, Maria Virvou and Lakhmi Jain.
[21] K. Metaxiotis & K. Liagkouras (2015) The solution of the 0-1 multi-objective knapsack problem with the assistance of multi-objective evolutionary algorithms based on decomposition: A comparative study, 2015 5th International Workshop on Computer Science and Engineering: Information Processing and Control Engineering, WCSE 2015-IPCE.
[22] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2015) Advanced Technologies and Algorithms for Efficient Portfolio Selection, International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic and Management Engineering Vol:9, No:7, 2015, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology.
[23] K. Metaxiotis & K. Liagkouras (2014) An exploratory crossover operator for improving the performance of MOEAs, Advances in Applied and Pure Mathematics, pp. 158-162, ISBN: 978-1-61804-240-8.
[24] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2014) Application of Customer Relationship Management Systems in Business: Challenges and Opportunities, International Journal of Social, Education, Economics and Management Engineering Vol:8, No:6, 2014, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology.
[25] Metaxiotis, K. & Liagkouras, K. (2014) An Expert System Designed to Be Used with MOEAs for Efficient Portfolio Selection, International Journal of Computer, Information Science and Engineering Vol:8 No:2, 2014, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology.
[26] K. Metaxiotis & K. Liagkouras (2013) A fitness guided mutation operator for improved performance of MOEAs Electronics, Circuits, and Systems (ICECS), 2013 IEEE 20th International Conference on, pp. 751-754, DOI: 10.1109/ICECS.2013.6815523.
[27] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2013) The Constrained Mean-Semivariance Portfolio Optimization Problem with the Support of a Novel Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm, Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 2013, 6, 22-29 doi:10.4236/ jsea.2013.67B005.
[28] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2013) An Elitist Polynomial Mutation Operator for Improved Performance of MOEAs in Computer Networks, pp. 1-5, Computer Communications and Networks (ICCCN), 2013 22nd International Conference on, DOI: 10.1109/ ICCCN.2013.6614105.
[29] K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis (2012) Modern Portfolio Management with the Support of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: An Analysis of Problem Formulation Issues, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 69 2012, Paris, France 27 – 28 June 2012.
[30] E. Zitzler, K. Deb and L. Thiele (2000). Comparison of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: Empirical results. Evolutionary Computation 8(2): 173–195.