Comparative analysis of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms for random and correlated instances of multiobjective d-dimensional knapsack problems

This study analyzes multiobjective d-dimensional knapsack problems (MOd-KP) within a comparative analysis of three multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs): the ε-nondominated sorted genetic algorithm II ( ε-NSGAII), the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm 2 (SPEA2) and the ε-nondominated h...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEuropean journal of operational research Vol. 211; no. 3; pp. 466 - 479
Main Authors Shah, Ruchit, Reed, Patrick
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 16.06.2011
Elsevier
Elsevier Sequoia S.A
SeriesEuropean Journal of Operational Research
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0377-2217
1872-6860
DOI10.1016/j.ejor.2011.01.030

Cover

More Information
Summary:This study analyzes multiobjective d-dimensional knapsack problems (MOd-KP) within a comparative analysis of three multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs): the ε-nondominated sorted genetic algorithm II ( ε-NSGAII), the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm 2 (SPEA2) and the ε-nondominated hierarchical Bayesian optimization algorithm ( ε-hBOA). This study contributes new insights into the challenges posed by correlated instances of the MOd-KP that better capture the decision interdependencies often present in real world applications. A statistical performance analysis of the algorithms uses the unary ε-indicator, the hypervolume indicator and success rate plots to demonstrate their relative effectiveness, efficiency, and reliability for the MOd-KP instances analyzed. Our results indicate that the ε-hBOA achieves superior performance relative to ε-NSGAII and SPEA2 with increasing number of objectives, number of decisions, and correlative linkages between the two. Performance of the ε-hBOA suggests that probabilistic model building evolutionary algorithms have significant promise for expanding the size and scope of challenging multiobjective problems that can be explored.
Bibliography:SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0377-2217
1872-6860
DOI:10.1016/j.ejor.2011.01.030