P.D. Surry and N.J. Radcli#e. The COMOGA method: Constrained optimisation by multiobjective genetic algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3), 1997.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....problem. This is the selection mechanism adopted in the Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithm (VEGA) 23] We will now provide a brief discussion of the different approaches that have been proposed in the literature adopting the three main ideas previously indicated. 3. 1 COMOGA Surry Radcliffe [24] used a combination of the Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithm (VEGA) 23] and Pareto Ranking to handle constraints in an approach called COMOGA (Constrained Optimization by Multi Objective Genetic Algorithms) In this technique, individuals are ranked depending of their sum of constraint ....

....function, its main advantage is that it does not requiere a fine tuning of penalty factors or any other additional parameter. The main drawback of COMOGA is that it requires several extra parameters, although its authors argue that the technique is not particularly sensitive to their values [24]. 3.2 VEGA Parmee Purchase [18] proposed to use VEGA [23] to guide the search of an evolutionary algorithm to the feasible region of an optimal gas turbine design problem with a heavily constrained search space. After having a feasible point, they generated an optimal hypercube around it in ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Patrick D. Surry and Nicholas J. Radcliffe. The COMOGA Method: Constrained Optimisation by Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3):391--412, 1997.

....The main drawback of this approach is, again, its relative complexity (i.e. its diculty to implement it) and it would also be desirable that the approach is further re ned so that it can get closer to the global optimum than the current available version. 3. 6 COMOGA Surry Radcli e [42] used a combination of the Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithm (VEGA) 40] and Pareto Ranking to handle constraints in an approach called COMOGA (Constrained Optimization by Multi Objective Genetic Algorithms) In this technique, individuals are ranked depending of their sum of constraint ....

....penalty function, its main advantage is that it does not requiere a ne tuning of penalty factors or any other additional parameter. The main drawback of COMOGA is that it requires several extra parameters, although its authors argue that the technique is not particularly sensitive to their values [42]. The algorithm of COMOGA is the following [42] Calculate constraint violation for all solutions. Rank solutions based on constraint violation (nondominance checking) Evaluate the tness of solutions. Select a P cost proportion of parents based on tness and the remaining 1 P cost based on ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Patrick D. Surry and Nicholas J. Radclie. The COMOGA Method: Constrained Optimisation by Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3):391-412, 1997.

....optimization technique [7] to the new vector ( m f f f v , 1 L = where m f f , 1 L are the original constraints of the problem. An ideal solution x would thus have ( 0 = x f i m i 1 and ( y f x f r r for all feasible y (assuming minimization) Surry et al. [15,14] proposed the use of Pareto ranking [6] and VEGA [13] to handle constraints using this technique. In their approach, called COMOGA, the population was ranked based on constraint violations (counting the number of individuals dominated by each solution) Then, one portion of the population was ....

Surry P. and Radcliffe NJ. (1997) The COMOGA Method: Constrained Optimisation by Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3).

....technique [60] to the new vector v = f( x) f 1 ( x) fm ( x) where f 1 ( x) fm ( x) are the original constraints of the problem. An ideal solution x would thus have f i ( x) 0 for 1 i m and f( x) f( y) for all feasible y (assuming minimization) Surry et al. [168, 167] proposed the use of Pareto ranking [59] and VEGA [151] to handle constraints using this technique. In their approach, called COMOGA, the population was ranked based on constraint violations (counting the number of individuals dominated by each solution) Then, one portion of the population was ....

....of Michalewicz [104] at a lower computational cost. 23 COMOGA compared fairly with a penalty based approach in a pipe sizing problem, since the resulting EA was less sensitive to changes in the parameters. However, the results achieved were not better than those found with a penalty function [167]. It should be added that COMOGA [168, 167] requires several extra parameters, although its authors argue that the technique is not particularly sensitive to their values [167] This technique uses Pareto ranking based on constraint violation [168] From Operations Research we know that ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Patrick D. Surry and Nicholas J. Radclie. The COMOGA Method: Constrained Optimisation by Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3), 1997.

....test the e ectiveness and eciency of our method, which can be regarded as an exterior penalty approach. One approach to avoid setting a hard to set parameter r g is to treat constrained optimization as multiobjective optimization where constraints are regarded as an additional objective function [23], 2] However, multiobjective optimization does not appear to be any easier than constrained optimization since one has to balance di erent objectives in optimization. The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section II discusses the relationship between r g and ranking in more details. ....

....is, given any pair of two adjacent individuals, the probability of comparing them (in order to determine which one is tter) according to the objective function is 1 if both individuals are feasible, otherwise it is P f . This appears to be similar to the use of a probability by Surry and Radcli e [23] in deciding the outcome of competitions between two individuals in tournament selection. Our technique is, however, quite di erent because we use rank based selection and we do not have any extra computational cost for self adapting P f . More importantly, the motivation of stochastic ranking ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

P.D. Surry and N.J. Radclie. The COMOGA method: Constrained optimisation by multiobjective genetic algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3), 1997.

.... Fleming 1995, Coello 1999) to the new vector v = f( x) f 1 ( x) f m ( x) where f 1 ( x) f m ( x) are the original constraints of the problem. An ideal solution x would thus have f i ( x) 0 for 1 i m and f( x) f( y) for all feasible y (assuming minimization) Surry et al. 1995, 1997) proposed the use of Pareto ranking (Fonseca Fleming 1993) and VEGA (Scha er 1985) to handle constraints using this technique. In their approach, called COMOGA, the population was ranked based on constraint violations (counting the number of individuals dominated by each solution) Then, one ....

Surry, P. D. & Radclie, N. J. (1997), `The COMOGA Method: Constrained Optimisation by Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms', Control and Cybernetics 26(3).

....any multiobjective optimization technique [23] to the new vector v = f; f 1 ; fm ) where f 1 ; fm are the original constraints of the problem. An ideal solution x would thus have f i ( x) 0 for 1 i m and f( x) f( y) for all feasible y (assuming minimization) Surry et al. [50, 49] proposed the use of Pareto ranking [22] and VEGA [43] to handle constraints using this technique. In their approach, called COMOGA, the population was ranked based on constraint violations (counting the number of individuals dominated by each solution) Then, one portion of the population was ....

Patrick D. Surry and Nicholas J. Radcliffe. The COMOGA Method: Constrained Optimisation by Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3), 1997.

....any multiobjective optimization technique [9, 5] to the new vector v = f; f 1 ; fm ) where f 1 ; fm are the original constraints of the problem. An ideal solution X would thus have f i (X) 0 for 1 i m and f(X) f(Y) for all feasible Y (assuming minimization) Surry et al. [24, 23] proposed the use of Pareto ranking [8] and VEGA [22] to handle constraints using this technique. In their approach, called COMOGA, the population was ranked based on constraint violations (counting the number of individuals dominated by each solution) Then, one portion of the population was ....

P. D. Surry and N. J. Radcliffe. The COMOGA Method: Constrained Optimisation by Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3), 1997.

....oil field production scheduling were made possible thanks to the assistance and encouragement of Alasdair Bruce and Dr. Timothy Harding respectively. The COMOGA approach of chapter 11 was first developed through study of the pipe sizing problem reported in Surry et al. 1995) and later expanded in Surry Radcliffe (1997). Declaration I declare that this thesis was composed by myself and that the work contained therein is my own, except where explicitly stated otherwise in the text. Patrick David Surry) 2 Table of Contents Glossary of Symbols 6 List of Figures 8 List of Tables 10 Chapter 1 Introduction 11 ....

P. D. Surry and N. J. Radcliffe, 1997. The COMOGA method: Constrained optimisation by multiobjective genetic algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3).

No context found.

P.D. Surry and N.J. Radcli#e. The COMOGA method: Constrained optimisation by multiobjective genetic algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3), 1997.

No context found.

P.D. Surry, N.J. Radcliffe, The COMOGA method: constrained optimisation by multiobjective genetic algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 1997, 26(3), pp. 391-412.

No context found.

Patrick D. Surry and Nicholas J. Radcliffe. The COMOGA Method: Constrained Optimisation by Multiobjective Genetic Algorithms. Control and Cybernetics, 26(3), 1997.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC