Progressively Interactive Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Deb, K. and Sinha, A. (2009a). Constructing test problems for bilevel evolutionary multi-objective optimization. In Proceedings of the Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC-2009).Piscataway,NJ:IEEEPress. (AlsoKanGAL Report No. 2008010). Deb, K. and Sinha, A. (2009b). Solving bilevel multi-objective optimization problems using evolutionary algorithms. In Proceedings of Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization(EMO-2009),pages110–124.Heidelberg: Springer. Deb, K., Agrawal, S., Pratap, A., and Meyarivan, T. (2002). A fast and elitist multiobjectivegeneticalgorithm: NSGA-II. IEEETransactionsonEvolutionaryComputation, 6(2),182–197. Deb, K., Thiele, L., Laumanns, M., and Zitzler, E. (2005). Scalable test problems for evolutionary multi-objective optimization. InA.Abraham,L.Jain,and R. Goldberg, editors, Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization, pages 105–145. London: Springer- Verlag. Dempe, S.(2002). Foundationsof bilevel programming. Kluwer,Dordrecht. Dempe, S., Dutta, J., and Lohse, S. (2006). Optimality conditions for bilevel programming problems. Optimization,55(5-6),505–524. Dimitriou, L., Tsekeris, T., and Stathopoulos, A. (2008). Genetic computation of road network designandpricingStackelberggameswithmulti-class users. InProceedings of EvoWorkshops,pages669–678. AlsoLNCS4974. Eichfelder, G. (2007). Solving nonlinear multiobjective bilevel optimization problems with coupled upper level constraints. Technical Report Preprint No. 320, Preprint- Seriesof the Institute of AppliedMathematics,Univ.Erlangen-Nürnberg,Germany. Eichfelder, G. (2008). Multiobjective bilevel optimization. Mathematical Programming. DOI 10.1007/s10107-008-0259-0. Fampa, M., Barroso, L. A., Candal, D., and Simonetti, L. (2008). Bilevel optimization applied to strategic pricing in competitive electricity markets. Comput. Optim.Appl., 39,121–142. Fliege,J.andVicente,L.N.(2006). Multicriteriaapproachtobileveloptimization. Journal of OptimizationTheoryand Applications,131(2),209–225. Fonseca, C.M.andFleming, P. J.(1996). On theperformanceassessment andcomparisonofstochasticmultiobjectiveoptimizers.InH.-M.Voigt,W.Ebeling,I.Rechenberg, andH.-P.Schwefel,editors,ParallelProblemSolvingfromNature(PPSNIV),pages584– 593.Berlin: Springer. AlsoavailableasLectureNotes inComputer Science1141. Fudenberg,D.and Tirole,J.(1993). Gametheory. MITPress. Gaur, A. and Arora, S. R. (2008). Multi-level multi-attribute multi-objective integer linear programming problem. AMO-AdvancedModeling and Optimization,10(2),297– 322. Halter, W. and Mostaghim, S. (2006). Bilevel optimization of multi-component chemical systems using particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of World Congress on ComputationalIntelligence(WCCI-2006),pages1240–1247. 112
Hecheng,L.andWang,Y.(2007). Ageneticalgorithmforsolvingaspecialclassofnonlinearbilevelprogrammingproblems. In7thinternational conferenceon Computational Science, PartIV:ICCS 2007,pages 1159–1162. AlsoLNCS4490. Herskovits,J.,Leontiev,A.,Dias,G.,andSantos,G.(2000). Contactshapeoptimization: Abilevel programming approach. Struct.Multidisc. Optimization,20,214–221. Koh,A.(2007). Solvingtransportationbi-levelprogramswithdifferentialevolution. In 2007 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC-2007), pages 2243–2250. IEEE Press. Li, H. and Wang, Y. (2007). A hybrid genetic algorithm for solving nonlinear bilevel programming problems based on the simplex method. In Third International Conferenceon NaturalComputation(ICNC2007),pages 91–95. Li, X., Tian, P., and Min, X. (2006). A hierarchical particle swarm optimization for solving bilevelprogrammingproblems. InProceedingsofArtificialIntelligenceandSoft Computing(ICAISC2006),pages 1169–1178. AlsoLNAI4029. Mathieu, R., Pittard, L., and Anandalingam, G. (1994). Genetic algorithm based approachtobi-levellinear programming. OperationsResearch, 28(1),1–21. Miettinen, K.(1999). Nonlinear MultiobjectiveOptimization. Kluwer, Boston. Nolle,L.(2006).Onahill-climbingalgorithmwithadaptivestepsize: Towardsacontrol parameter-lessblack-boxoptimizationalgorithm. InB.Reusch,editor,Computational Intelligence, TheoryandApplications,pages587–596.Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Oduguwa, V. and Roy, R. (2002). Bi-level optimisation using genetic algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Systems (ICAIS-02),pages 322–327. Pakala, R. R. (1993). A Study on Applications of Stackelberg Game Strategies in Concurrent Design Models. Master’s thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering: University of Houston. Paruchuri, P., Pearce, J. P., Marecki, J., Tambe, M., Ordonez, F., and Kraus, S. (2008). EfficientalgorithmstosolvebayesianStackelberggamesforsecurityapplications. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1559– 1562. Rao, S.S.(1984). Optimization: Theoryand Applications. Wiley, New York. Reklaitis, G. V., Ravindran, A., and Ragsdell, K. M. (1983). Engineering Optimization Methodsand Applications. New York : Wiley. Shi,X.andXia,H.S.(2001). Modelandinteractivealgorithmofbi-levelmulti-objective decision-making with multiple interconnected decision makers. Journal of Multi- Criteria Decision Analysis,10(1),27–34. Sinha, A. and Deb, K. (2009). Towards understanding evolutionary bilevel multiobjective optimization algorithm. Technical Report Proceedings of the IFAC Workshop on Control Applications of Optimization (6-8 May, 2009, Jyväskylä, Finland), Kanpur,IndianInstitute of Technology, India. (AlsoKanGAL Report No. 2008006). 113
Page 1 and 2:
Department of Business Technology P
Page 3 and 4:
Aalto University publication series
Page 5 and 6:
Progressively Interactive Evolution
Page 7:
Acknowledgements The dissertation h
Page 10 and 11:
II List of Papers 27 1 An interacti
Page 12 and 13:
1 Introduction Many real-world appl
Page 14 and 15:
• f(x (1) ) ≥ f(x (2) ) fi(x (1
Page 16 and 17:
for a maximization problem. Mathema
Page 18 and 19:
• x (1) ∼ x (2) ⇔ x (1) and x
Page 20 and 21:
Start Initialise Population Assign
Page 22 and 23:
ithm can approximate the Pareto-opt
Page 24 and 25:
Minimize/Maximize F(x) = (f1(x), f2
Page 26 and 27:
the search is chosen. A scalarizing
Page 28 and 29:
of the papers is provided in this s
Page 30:
problems. The study discusses some
Page 33 and 34:
[9] K. Deb and A. Sinha. An efficie
Page 35 and 36:
[31] L. Thiele, K. Miettinen, P. Ko
Page 37 and 38:
1 An interactive evolutionary multi
Page 39 and 40:
DM and an MCDM-based EMO algorithm
Page 41 and 42:
In Step 2, points in the best non-d
Page 43 and 44:
esulting constraints then become ki
Page 45 and 46:
mechanisms) and their emphasis of n
Page 47 and 48:
f2 10 8 6 4 2 P1 P2 Most preferred
Page 49 and 50:
DM calls. As mentioned earlier, the
Page 51 and 52:
A linear value function similar to
Page 53 and 54:
on developed value function. For ex
Page 55 and 56:
2 Progressively interactive evoluti
Page 57 and 58:
DM one or more pairs of alternative
Page 59 and 60:
f 2 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 P
Page 61 and 62:
TABLE III DISTANCE OF OBTAINED SOLU
Page 63:
The PI-EMO-VF algorithm has been te
Page 66 and 67:
An Interactive Evolutionary Multi-O
Page 68 and 69:
direction has been done by Phelps a
Page 70 and 71: 0 ∀ i ∈ {1, . . . , M}, then th
Page 72 and 73: f2 0000000000000 1111111111111 0000
Page 74 and 75: Table 1. Final solutions obtained b
Page 76 and 77: Table 4. Distance of obtained solut
Page 78 and 79: DM Calls and Func. Evals. (in thous
Page 80 and 81: 13. P. Korhonen and J. Laakso, “A
Page 82 and 83: An EfficientandAccurateSolution Met
Page 84 and 85: eight differentproblems areshown. A
Page 86 and 87: 3.2 AlgorithmicDevelopments Onesimp
Page 88 and 89: more studies are performed, the alg
Page 90 and 91: 4.4 TestProblemTP4 The next problem
Page 92 and 93: F2 Step 3: Map (U1,U2) to (f1*,f2*)
Page 94 and 95: F2 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 A y1
Page 96 and 97: • Theupperlevelproblemhas multi-m
Page 98 and 99: are K + L + 1real-valuedvariablesin
Page 100 and 101: thereafterinaself-adaptivemannerbyd
Page 102 and 103: ulation of Nl(x (1) u ) lower level
Page 104 and 105: NSGA-II is able to bring the member
Page 106 and 107: F2 0 −0.2 −0.4 −0.6 −0.8
Page 108 and 109: LL Function Evals. UL Function Eval
Page 114 and 115: Table 1: Total function evaluations
Page 116 and 117: Difference in HV, DH(T) 350000 3000
Page 118 and 119: Table 4: Comparison of function eva
Page 122 and 123: Sun, D., Benekohal, R. F., and Wall
Page 124 and 125: Bilevel Multi-Objective Optimizatio
Page 126 and 127: The constraint functions g(x) and h
Page 128 and 129: value function which are required t
Page 130 and 131: to get close to the most preferred
Page 132 and 133: F2 0.4 0.2 0 −0.2 Lower level P
Page 134 and 135: F2 2 1.5 1 0.5 Most Preferred Point
Page 136 and 137: provement in terms of function eval
Page 138: 9HSTFMG*aeafcd+ ISBN: 978-952-60-40
show all

Progressively Interactive Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?