Paper detail

A collaborative decomposition-based evolutionary algorithm integrating normal and penalty-based boundary intersection for many-objective optimization

Decomposition-based evolutionary algorithms have become fairly popular for many-objective optimization in recent years. However, the existing decomposition methods still are quite sensitive to the various shapes of frontiers of many-objective optimization problems (MaOPs). On the one hand, the cone decomposition methods such as the penalty-based boundary intersection (PBI) are incapable of acquiring uniform frontiers for MaOPs with very convex frontiers. On the other hand, the parallel reference lines of the parallel decomposition methods including the normal boundary intersection (NBI) might result in poor diversity because of under-sampling near the boundaries for MaOPs with concave frontiers. In this paper, a collaborative decomposition method is first proposed to integrate the advantages of parallel decomposition and cone decomposition to overcome their respective disadvantages. This method inherits the NBI-style Tchebycheff function as a convergence measure to heighten the convergence and uniformity of distribution of the PBI method. Moreover, this method also adaptively tunes the extent of rotating an NBI reference line towards a PBI reference line for every subproblem to enhance the diversity of distribution of the NBI method. Furthermore, a collaborative decomposition-based evolutionary algorithm (CoDEA) is presented for many-objective optimization. A collaborative decomposition-based environmental selection mechanism is primarily designed in CoDEA to rank all the individuals associated with the same PBI reference line in the boundary layer and pick out the best ranks. CoDEA is compared with several popular algorithms on 85 benchmark test instances. The experimental results show that CoDEA achieves high competitiveness benefiting from the collaborative decomposition maintaining a good balance among the convergence, uniformity, and diversity of distribution.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.