J.D. Schaffer. Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 99--100, 1985.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....be easily combined with those EMO algorithms for designing multiobjective memetic algorithms. Index Terms Multiobjective optimization, evolutionary multiobjective optimization, memetic algorithms, genetic local search, permutation flowshop scheduling. I. INTRODUCTION Since Schaffer s study [1], evolutionary algorithms have been applied to various 2multiobjective optimization problems for finding their Pareto optimal solutions. Evolutionary algorithms for multiobjective optimization are often referred to as EMO (evolutionary multiobjective optimization) algorithms. For review of this ....

....its local search part, we explain test problems and performance measures used in this paper. In the same manner as in [21] we generated eight m machine n job permutation flowshop scheduling problems. The processing time of each job on each machine was specified as a random integer in the interval [1, 99]. The due date of each job was specified by adding a random integer in the interval [ 100, 100] to its actual completion time in a randomly generated schedule. All the eight test problems have 20 machines (i.e. m 20) Using the number of objectives (N) and the number of jobs (n) we denote each ....

J. D. Schaffer, "Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms," Proc. of 1st International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications, pp. 93100, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, July 24-26, 1985.

....Joho Tsushin Gakkai Ronbunshi, Vol. J80 A, No. 1, January 1997, pp. 170 177 64 applications to optimization problems has increased. The second edition [3] was published in 1994, and further developments are expected in this field. Vector evaluated genetic algorithms (VEGA) proposed by Schaffer [4] for multiobjective optimization problems are based on an extension of the traditional fitness function of genetic algorithms from a scalar to a vector function. Further developments followed as a result of this idea [5] However, in all of these multiple evaluation genetic algorithm techniques, ....

J.D. Schaffer. Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, pp. 160--168 (1985).

....of nondominated solutions along the Pareto front. V. COMPARISON OF RESULTS In order to validate our proposed approach, we used a set of test functions which have commonly been adopted as a benchmark in the specialized literature [3] The first test function, MOP1, was proposed by Schaffer [21]; our second test function, MOP2, was proposed by Fonseca [9] our third test function MOP3 was proposed by Poloni [16] MOP4 was proposed by Kursawe [15] Finally, MOP6 was designed following Deb s methodology [5] All these functions have variable degrees of difficulty. There are problems with ....

J. David Schaffer. Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms. In Genetic Algorithms and their Applications: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 93--100. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1985.

....case) are assigned a higher fitness value. 3. Split the population in subpopulations that are evaluated either with respect to the objective function or with respect to a single constraint of the 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 ....

....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 violation (number of individuals dominated by a solution) However, the selection ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

J. David Schaffer. Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms. In Genetic Algorithms and their Applications: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 93--100. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1985.

.... introduced by Holland [6] 11] 12] and subsequently studied by De Jong [13] 14] 15] 16] Goldberg [17] 18] 19] 20] 21] and others such as Davis [22] Eshelman [23] 24] Forrest [25] Grefenstette [26] 27] 28] 29] Koza [30] 31] Mitchell [32] Riolo [33] 34] Schaffer [35], 36] 37] to name only a few, have been originally proposed as a general model of adaptive processes, but by far the largest application of the techniques is in the domain of optimization [15] 16] Since this is true for all three of the main stream algorithms presented in this paper we ....

J. D. Schaffer, "Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms," In Grefenstette [56], pp. 93-- 100.

....be satisfied without compar ing many alternatives simultaneously. Even if the shown alternative is best one , we may have a difficulty in de cision making and doubt whether there is no better ones for him her. Recently, there axe studies to generate many Pareto optimal solutions by using GA[10] 7] 1] This is certainly aa attractive method, because the GA intrinsically treats multiple alternatives. But there is some kind of inc4 ficiency in generating Pareto optimal solutions by GAbused methods that have been proposed so far, because the new alternatives axe to be generated by using ....

....so that it can yield multimodal problems, where techniques suck as crowding and nicking are created to avoid the individuals to converge and to let the individuals be more variety. Further, by using such techniques, GA has been applied to exhaustively generating Pareto optimal solutions. Schaffer[10] developed a program called Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithm (VEGA) In VEGA, selection is made based on each component s value interchangeably. In other words, let ci X. For j = 1, pT 1, p, selection is made based on the fitness j( with GA s selection mechanism. This has the ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

J. D. Schaffer, "Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic aigorithms", Proc. It. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms and Thei Applications, pp. 93-100, 1985.

....non Pareto approaches and the Pareto approaches. Many examples of aggregation approaches exist, from simple weighting and summing [7,15] to the multiple attribute utility analysis (MAUA) of Horn and Nafpliotis [9] Of the non Pareto approaches, perhaps the most well known is Schaffer s VEGA [11,12], who (as identified by Fonseca [3] does not directly make use of the actual definition of Pareto optimality. Many other non Pareto methods have been proposed (e.g. by Linkens [5] Ryan [10] and Sun [14] Finally the Pareto based methods, proposed first by Goldberg [7] have been explored by ....

....by the GA, and for no other values of x. Although occasionally the effective range of all of the objective functions will be the same, in most more complex multiobjective tasks, every separate objective function will have a different effective range (i.e. the function ranges are noncommensurable [12]) This means that a bad value for one could be a reasonable or even good value for another, see fig. 2. If the results from these two objective functions were simply added to produce a single fitness value for the GA, the function with the largest range would dominate evolution (a poor input ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Schaffer, J. D., 1985, Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms. Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, 93-100.

No context found.

J.D. Schaffer. Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 99--100, 1985.

No context found.

Schaffer J.D.: Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In: Grefenstette J.J., eds. Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale NJ (1985), 93-100.

No context found.

J. Schaffer, "Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms," in Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, 1985, pp. 99--100.

No context found.

J.D. Schaffer. Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In Proc. of the First Int. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, pages 99--100, 1985.

No context found.

J. D. Schaffer. Multiple Objective Optimization With Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms. PhD thesis, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA, 1984.

No context found.

J.D. Schaffer. Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 99--100, 1985.

No context found.

J. David Schaffer. Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In John J. Grefenstette, editor, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and their Applications, pages 93--100, Hillsdale, NJ, 1985. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

No context found.

Schaffer, J. D.: Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms, Proc. of 1st International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications (1985) 93-100.

No context found.

J. D. Schaffer. "Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms". In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, 1985, 93-100.

No context found.

Schaffer, J. D. (1985) "Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms, " Proc. of 1st International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications, pp. 93-100

No context found.

J.D. Schaffer. Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 99--100, 1985.

No context found.

J. D. Schaffer. Multiple Objective Optimization With Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms. PhD thesis, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA, 1984.

No context found.

J. D. Schaffer. Multiple Objective Optimization With Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms. PhD thesis, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA, 1984.

No context found.

J. David Schaffer. Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms. In Genetic Algorithms and their Applications: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 93--100. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1985.

No context found.

J. D. Schaffer. Multiple Objective Optimization With Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms. PhD thesis, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA, 1984.

No context found.

J. D. Schaffer, "Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms," Proc. of 1st International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications, pp. 93-100, 1985.

No context found.

Schaffer J., "Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms," presented at 1st Int. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, Pittsburgh, 1985.

No context found.

J. D. Schaffer, "Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms," in Proc. 1st ICGA, 1985, pp. 93--100.

First 50 documents  Next 50

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