Multiobjective Evolutionary Component Effect on Algorithm behavior

TL;DR

This paper investigates how different components of automatically designed multiobjective evolutionary algorithms influence their performance across various problem types, using a new methodology to analyze their behavior.

Contribution

It introduces a methodology to analyze the effects of algorithm components on performance, applied to a tuned MOEA/D on diverse constrained problems.

Findings

Algorithms converged quickly on analytical problems with good hypervolume values.

Diverse search trajectories observed in artificial problems, indicating varied exploration.

Performance varied across problem types, with some algorithms still improving at the end of runs.

Abstract

The performance of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) varies across problems, making it hard to develop new algorithms or apply existing ones to new problems. To simplify the development and application of new multiobjective algorithms, there has been an increasing interest in their automatic design from their components. These automatically designed metaheuristics can outperform their human-developed counterparts. However, it is still unknown what are the most influential components that lead to performance improvements. This study specifies a new methodology to investigate the effects of the final configuration of an automatically designed algorithm. We apply this methodology to a tuned Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm based on Decomposition (MOEA/D) designed by the iterated racing (irace) configuration package on constrained problems of 3 groups: (1) analytical real-world problems, (2) analytical artificial problems and (3) simulated real-world. We then compare the impact of the algorithm components in terms of their Search Trajectory Networks (STNs), the diversity of the population, and the anytime hypervolume values. Looking at the objective space behavior, the MOEAs studied converged before half of the search to generally good HV values in the analytical artificial problems and the analytical real-world problems. For the simulated problems, the HV values are still improving at the end of the run. In terms of decision space behavior, we see a diverse set of the trajectories of the STNs in the analytical artificial problems. These trajectories are more similar and frequently reach optimal solutions in the other problems.