An adaptive ES with a ranking based constraint handling strategy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2298/YJOR140121035KKeywords:
constrained optimization, evolution strategies, covariance matrix adaptationAbstract
To solve a constrained optimization problem, equality constraints can be used to eliminate a problem variable. If it is not feasible, the relations imposed implicitly by the constraints can still be exploited. Most conventional constraint handling methods in Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs) do not consider the correlations between problem variables imposed by the constraints. This paper relies on the idea that a proper search operator, which captures mentioned implicit correlations, can improve performance of evolutionary constrained optimization algorithms. To realize this, an Evolution Strategy (ES) along with a simplified Covariance Matrix Adaptation (CMA) based mutation operator is used with a ranking based constraint-handling method. The proposed algorithm is tested on 13 benchmark problems as well as on a real life design problem. The outperformance of the algorithm is significant when compared with conventional ES-based methods.References
Yang, Y.W., Xu, J.F., and Soh, C.K., “An evolutionary programming algorithm for continuous global optimization,” European Journal of Operational Research, 168 (2) (2006) 354–369.
Ben Hamida, S. and Petrowski, A., “The need for improving the exploration operators for constrained optimization problems,” in: Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, CEC00 (Cat. No.00TH8512) (2000) 1176–1183.
Michalewicz, Z. and Schoenauer, M., “Evolutionary Algorithms for Constrained Parameter Optimization Problems,” Evolutionary Computation, 4 (1996) 1–32.
Ben Hamida, S. and Schoenauer, M., “ASCHEA: New Results Using Adaptive Segregational Constraint Handling,” in: 2002 Congress On Evolutionary Computation IEEE, (2002) 884-889.
Ho, P.Y. and Shimizu, K., “Evolutionary constrained optimization using an addition of ranking method and a percentage-based tolerance value adjustment scheme,” Information Sciences, 177 (14) (2007) 2985–3004.
Runarsson, T.P. and Yao, X., “Stochastic ranking for constrained evolutionary optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 4 (3) (2000) 284–294.
Kusakci, A.O. and Can, M., “An adaptive penalty based covariance matrix adaptation evolution strategy,” Computers & Operations Research, 40 (10) (2013) 2398–2417.
Hansen, N. and Ostermeier, A., “Completely derandomized self-adaptation in evolution strategies,” Evolutionary computation, 9 (2) (2001) 159–95.
Mezura-Montes, E. and Coello Coello, C.A., “Constraint-handling in nature-inspired numerical optimization: Past, present and future,” Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 1 (4) (2011) 173–194.
Kusakci, A.O. and Can, M., “Constrained Optimization with Evolutionary Algorithms: A Comprehensive Review,” Southeast Europe Journal of Soft Computing, 1 (2) (2012) 16–24.
Yu, X. and Gen, M., Introduction to Evolutionary Algorithms, Springer, London, 2010.
Koziel, S. and Michalewicz, Z., “Evolutionary Algorithms, Homomorphous Mappings, and Constrained Parameter Optimization,” Evolutionary Computation, 7 (1) (1999) 19–44.
Deb, K., “An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithms,” Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 186 (2000) 311–338.
Singh, H.K., Isaacs, A., Nguyen, T.T., and Ray, T., “Performance of infeasibility driven evolutionary algorithm (IDEA) on constrained dynamic single objective optimization problems,” in: 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, (2009) 3127–3134.
Hansen, N., “The CMA Evolution Strategy: A Tutorial,” (2008) [Online]. Available: URL www.bionik.tu-berlin.de/user/niko/cmatutorial.pdf. [Accessed: 20-Feb-2013].
Hansen, N. and Kern, S., “Evaluating the CMA evolution strategy on multimodal test functions,” Parallel Probl. Solving from Nature-PPSN VIII, 10 (2004) 1–10.
Igel, C., Hansen, N., and Roth, S., “Covariance matrix adaptation for multi-objective optimization,” Evolutionary computation, 15 (1) (2007) 1–28.
Arnold, D.V. and Hansen, N., “A (1+1)-CMA-ES for constrained optimisation,” in: Proceedings of the fourteenth international conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation conference - GECCO ’12 (2012) 297–304.
Farmani, R. and Wright, J.A., “Self-adaptive fitness formulation for constrained optimization,” Evolutionary Computation IEEE, 7 (5) (2003) 445–455.
Mezura-Montes, E. and Coello, C.A.C., “A Simple Multimembered Evolution Strategy to Solve Constrained Optimization Problems,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 9 (1) (2005) 1–17.
Holm, S., “A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure,” Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6 (2) (1979) 65–70.
Garcia, S., Fernandez, A., Luengo, J., Herrera, F., “A study of statistical techniques and performance measures for genetics-based machine learning: accuracy and interpretability,” Soft Computing, 13 (10) (2008) 959–977.
Gandomi, A.H., Yang, X.S., and Alavi, A.H., “Mixed variable structural optimization using Firefly Algorithm,” Computers & Structures, 89 (23–24) (2011) 2325–2336.
Kusakci, A.O. and Can, M., “An adaptive evolution strategy for constrained optimisation problems in engineering design,” Southeast Europe Journal of Soft Computing, 6 (3) (2014) 175-191.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2014 YUJOR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.