×

zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Evolutionary robust optimization in production planning – interactions between number of objectives, sample size and choice of robustness measure. (English) Zbl 1391.90652
Summary: We aim to find robust solutions in optimization settings where there is uncertainty associated with the operating/environmental conditions, and the fitness of a solution is hence best described by a distribution of outcomes. In such settings, the nature of the fitness distribution (reflecting the performance of a particular solution across a set of operating scenarios) is of potential interest in deciding solution quality, and previous work has suggested the inclusion of robustness as an additional optimization objective. However, there has been limited investigation of different robustness criteria, and the impact this choice may have on the sample size needed to obtain reliable fitness estimates. Here, we investigate different single and multi-objective formulations for robust optimization, in the context of a real-world problem addressed via simulation-based optimization. For the (limited evaluation) setting considered, our results highlight the value of an explicit robustness criterion in steering an optimizer towards solutions that are not only robust (as may be expected), but also associated with a profit that is, on average, higher than that identified by standard single-objective approaches. We also observe significant interactions between the choice of robustness measure and the sample size employed during fitness evaluation, an effect that is more pronounced for our multi-objective models.

MSC:
90C59 Approximation methods and heuristics in mathematical programming
90C29 Multi-objective and goal programming
90B05 Inventory, storage, reservoirs
90B30 Production models
65K05 Numerical mathematical programming methods
Software:
SPOT
PDF BibTeX XML Cite
Full Text: DOI
References:
[1] Binois, M.; Ginsbourger, D.; Roustant, O., Quantifying uncertainty on Pareto fronts with Gaussian process conditional simulations, Eur J Oper Res, 243, 2, 386-394, (2015) · Zbl 1346.90730
[2] Branke J. Creating robust solutions by means of evolutionary algorithms. In: Parallel problem solving from nature PPSN V. Springer, ​Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 1998. p. 119-28.
[3] Branke, J.; Corrente, S.; Greco, S.; Słowiński, R.; Zielniewicz, P., Using Choquet integral as preference model in interactive evolutionary multiobjective optimization, Eur J Oper Res, 250, 3, 884-901, (2016) · Zbl 1346.90731
[4] Branke J, Lu K. Finding the trade-off between robustness and worst-case quality. In: Proceedings of the 2015 on genetic and evolutionary computation conference. ACM, Madrid, Spain; 2015. p. 623-30.
[5] Brownlee, A. E.; Wright, J. A., Constrained, mixed-integer and multi-objective optimisation of building designs by NSGA-II with fitness approximation, Appl Soft Comput, 33, 0, 114-126, (2015)
[6] Chen, L.; Gendreau, M.; Hà, M. H.; Langevin, A., A robust optimization approach for the road network daily maintenance routing problem with uncertain service time, Transp Res Part E: Logist Transp Rev, 85, 40-51, (2016)
[7] Ching, W. K.; Huang, X.; Ng, M. K.; Siu, T.-K., Markov chains, (2006), Springer
[8] Coello, C. A.C., Evolutionary multi-objective optimizationa historical view of the field, Comput Intell Mag IEEE, 1, 1, 28-36, (2006)
[9] Coello CAC. Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms in real-world applications: some recent results and current challenges. In: Advances in evolutionary and deterministic methods for design, optimization and control in engineering and sciences. Springer; 2015. p. 3-18.
[10] da Fonseca VG, Fonseca CM. The attainment-function approach to stochastic multiobjective optimizer assessment and comparison. In: Experimental methods for the analysis of optimization algorithms. Springer; 2010. p. 103-30.
[11] da Fonseca VG, Fonseca CM, Hall AO. Inferential performance assessment of stochastic optimisers and the attainment function. In: Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization. Springer, Zurich, Switzerland; 2001. p. 213-25.
[12] Deb, K., An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithms, Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng, 186, 2, 311-338, (2000) · Zbl 1028.90533
[13] Deb K. Multi-objective optimization. In: Search methodologies. Springer; 2014. p. 403-49.
[14] Deb, K.; Gupta, H., Introducing robustness in multi-objective optimization, Evolut Comput, 14, 4, 463-494, (2006)
[15] Deb, K.; Pratap, A.; Agarwal, S.; Meyarivan, T., A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithmnsga-II, IEEE Trans Evolut Comput, 6, 2, 182-197, (2002)
[16] Deep, K.; Singh, K. P.; Kansal, M.; Mohan, C., A real coded genetic algorithm for solving integer and mixed integer optimization problems, Appl Math Comput, 212, 2, 505-518, (2009) · Zbl 1168.65353
[17] Deep, K.; Thakur, M., A new crossover operator for real coded genetic algorithms, Appl Math Comput, 188, 1, 895-911, (2007) · Zbl 1137.90726
[18] Deep, K.; Thakur, M., A new mutation operator for real coded genetic algorithms, Appl Math Comput, 193, 1, 211-230, (2007) · Zbl 1193.68209
[19] Diaz JE. Simulation-based optimization for production planning: Integrating meta-heuristics, simulation and exact techniques to address the uncertainty and complexity of manufacturing systems [Ph.D. Thesis]. The University of Manchester; 2016.
[20] Ehrenberg C, Zimmermann J. Simulation-based optimization in make-to-order production: scheduling for a special-purpose glass manufacturer. In: Proceedings of the 2012 winter simulation conference (WSC). IEEE, Berlin, Germany; 2012. p. 1-12.
[21] Figueira, G.; Almada-Lobo, B., Hybrid simulation-optimization methodsa taxonomy and discussion, Simul Model Pract Theory, 46, 118-134, (2014)
[22] Fleischer M. The measure of Pareto optima applications to multi-objective metaheuristics. In: Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization. Springer, Faro, Portugal; 2003. p. 519-33.
[23] Fonseca CM. Fleming PJ. On the performance assessment and comparison of stochastic multiobjective optimizers. In: Parallel problem solving from nature PPSN IV. Springer, Berlin, Germany; 1996. p. 584-93.
[24] Gabrel, V.; Murat, C.; Thiele, A., Recent advances in robust optimizationan overview, Eur J Oper Res, 235, 3, 471-483, (2014) · Zbl 1305.90390
[25] Goh CK, Tan KC. Evolving the tradeoffs between Pareto-optimality and robustness in multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. In: Evolutionary computation in dynamic and uncertain environments. Springer; 2007. p. 457-78.
[26] Goh CK, Tan KC. Evolutionary multi-objective optimization in uncertain environments: issues and algorithms, vol. 186. Springer; 2009. · Zbl 1226.90004
[27] Goh, C. K.; Tan, K. C.; Cheong, C. Y.; Ong, Y.-S., An investigation on noise-induced features in robust evolutionary multi-objective optimization, Expert Syst Appl, 37, 8, 5960-5980, (2010)
[28] Guo, Z.; Wong, W.; Leung, S.; Fan, J.; Chan, S., A genetic-algorithm-based optimization model for solving the flexible assembly line balancing problem with work sharing and workstation revisiting, IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C: Appl Rev, 38, March (2), 218-228, (2008)
[29] Handl, J.; Kell, D. B.; Knowles, J., Multiobjective optimization in bioinformatics and computational biology, IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinforma (TCBB), 4, 2, 279-292, (2007)
[30] Jin, Y.; Branke, J., Evolutionary optimization in uncertain environments - a survey, IEEE Trans Evolut Comput, 9, 3, 303-317, (2005)
[31] Jin Y, Sendhoff B. Trade-off between performance and robustness: an evolutionary multiobjective approach. In: Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization. Springer, Faro, Portugal; 2003. p. 237-51. · Zbl 1036.90540
[32] Knowles J, Thiele L, Zitzler E. A tutorial on the performance assessment of stochastic multiobjective optimizers. Tik Report 214; 2006. p. 327-32.
[33] Lim, D.; Ong, Y.-S.; Jin, Y.; Sendhoff, B.; Lee, B. S., Inverse multi-objective robust evolutionary design, Genet Program Evol Mach, 7, 4, 383-404, (2006)
[34] Lim D, Ong YS, Lim MH, Jin Y. Single/multi-objective inverse robust evolutionary design methodology in the presence of uncertainty. In: Evolutionary computation in dynamic and uncertain environments. Springer; 2007. p. 437-56.
[35] López-Ibánez M, Paquete L, Stützle T. Exploratory analysis of stochastic local search algorithms in biobjective optimization. In: Experimental methods for the analysis of optimization algorithms. Springer; 2010. p. 209-22.
[36] Mann, H. B.; Whitney, D. R., On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other, Ann Math Stat, 50-60, (1947) · Zbl 0041.26103
[37] Marler, R. T.; Arora, J. S., The weighted sum method for multi-objective optimizationnew insights, Struct Multidiscip Optim, 41, 6, 853-862, (2010) · Zbl 1274.90359
[38] Minella, G.; Ruiz, R.; Ciavotta, M., Restarted iterated Pareto greedy algorithm for multi-objective flowshop scheduling problems, Comput Oper Res, 38, 11, 1521-1533, (2011)
[39] Mlakar, M.; Petelin, D.; Tuar, T.; Filipi, B., Gp-demodifferential evolution for multiobjective optimization based on Gaussian process models, Eur J Oper Res, 243, 2, 347-361, (2015)
[40] Nordstokke, D. W.; Zumbo, B. D., A new nonparametric levene test for equal variances, Psicologica, 31, 2, 401-430, (2010)
[41] Ong, Y.-S.; Nair, P. B.; Lum, K., MAX-MIN surrogate-assisted evolutionary algorithm for robust design, IEEE Trans Evolut Comput, 10, 4, 392-404, (2006)
[42] Paenke, I.; Branke, J.; Jin, Y., Efficient search for robust solutions by means of evolutionary algorithms and fitness approximation, IEEE Trans Evolut Comput, 10, 4, 405-420, (2006)
[43] Pereira V, Sousa P, Cortez P, Rio M, Rocha M. Comparison of single and multi-objective evolutionary algorithms for robust link-state routing. In: Evolutionary multi-criterion optimization. Springer, Guimarães, Portugal; 2015. p. 573-87.
[44] Ray T. Constrained robust optimal design using a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 2002 congress on evolutionary computation, vol. 1. IEEE, Honolulu, Hawaii; 2002. p. 419-24.
[45] Rooderkerk, R. P.; Van Heerde, H. J., Robust optimization of the 0-1 knapsack problembalancing risk and return in assortment optimization, Eur J Oper Res, 250, 3, 842-854, (2016) · Zbl 1346.90048
[46] Sanchez D, Amodeo L, Prins C. Meta-heuristic approaches for multi-objective simulation-based optimization in supply chain inventory management. In: Artificial intelligence techniques for networked manufacturing enterprises management. Springer; 2010. p. 249-69.
[47] Syberfeldt, A.; Ng, A.; John, R. I.; Moore, P., Evolutionary optimisation of noisy multi-objective problems using confidence-based dynamic resampling, Eur J Oper Res, 204, 3, 533-544, (2010) · Zbl 1181.90155
[48] Tsutsui S. A comparative study on the effects of adding perturbations to phenotypic parameters in genetic algorithms with a robust solution searching scheme. In: 1999 IEEE International conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, 1999. SMC’99 conference proceedings, vol. 3. IEEE, Tokyo, Japan; 1999. p. 585-91.
[49] Tsutsui, S.; Ghosh, A., Genetic algorithms with a robust solution searching scheme, IEEE Trans Evolut Comput, 1, 3, 201-208, (1997)
[50] Wang, Z.; Guo, J.; Zheng, M.; Wang, Y., Uncertain multiobjective traveling salesman problem, Eur J Oper Res, 241, 2, 478-489, (2015) · Zbl 1339.90290
[51] Zhang, Q.; Morari, M. F.; Grossmann, I. E.; Sundaramoorthy, A.; Pinto, J. M., An adjustable robust optimization approach to scheduling of continuous industrial processes providing interruptible load, Comput Chem Eng, 86, 106-119, (2016)
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.