4.7 Article

Constrained multi-objective optimization via two archives assisted push-pull evolutionary algorithm

期刊

SWARM AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION
卷 75, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.swevo.2022.101178

关键词

Constrained multi-objective optimization; Evolutionary algorithm; Push-pull; Two archives; epsilon-constrained technique

资金

  1. National Natural Science Fund of China
  2. Natural Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars of Hubei, China
  3. [62076225]
  4. [2019CFA081]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a new two-archives assisted push-pull evolutionary algorithm (PPTA) to effectively handle constrained multi-objective optimization problems (CMOPs) with complex infeasible regions. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of PPTA over other related methods.
Solving constrained multi-objective optimization problems (CMOPs) obtained more and more popularity in the last decade. Various constrained multi-objective optimization evolutionary algorithms were developed for the CMOPs. However, most of them are ineffective in dealing with CMOPs with complex infeasible regions. In this paper, the two archives assisted push-pull evolutionary algorithm (namely PPTA) is proposed to handle the CMOPs with complex infeasible regions effectively. PPTA has the following features: (i) Two archives (A and B) are used, where A is used in the push stage to promote convergence and diversity, and in the pull stage to explore undetected feasible regions; in the pull stage B is used for the promotion of convergence, diversity, and feasibility. (ii) A new push stage strategy is devised for better approximating the unconstrained Pareto front, as well as the constrained Pareto front. (iii) The aggregation function in the pull stage is improved to better explore the objective space. (iv) a new epsilon-constrained method is customized to enhance the ability to explore feasible regions. Results on 33 widely used instances and eight real-world problems verify the superiority of PPTA over 10 related methods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据