Theoretical Analyses of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms on Multimodal Objectives
December 14, 2020 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐ Evolutionary Computation
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Weijie Zheng, Benjamin Doerr
arXiv ID
2012.07231
Category
cs.NE: Neural & Evolutionary
Cross-listed
cs.AI
Citations
27
Venue
Evolutionary Computation
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
The theoretical understanding of MOEAs is lagging far behind their success in practice. In particular, previous theory work considers mostly easy problems that are composed of unimodal objectives. As a first step towards a deeper understanding of how evolutionary algorithms solve multimodal multiobjective problems, we propose the OJZJ problem, a bi-objective problem composed of two objectives isomorphic to the classic jump function benchmark. We prove that SEMO with probability one does not compute the full Pareto front, regardless of the runtime. In contrast, for all problem sizes $n$ and all jump sizes ${k \in [4..\frac n2 - 1]}$, the global SEMO (GSEMO) covers the Pareto front in an expected number of $ฮ((n-2k)n^{k})$ iterations. For $k = o(n)$, we also show the tighter bound $\frac 32 e n^{k+1} \pm o(n^{k+1})$, which might be the first runtime bound for an MOEA that is tight apart from lower-order terms. We also combine the GSEMO with two approaches that showed advantages in single-objective multimodal problems. When using the GSEMO with a heavy-tailed mutation operator, the expected runtime improves by a factor of at least $k^{ฮฉ(k)}$. When adapting the recent stagnation-detection strategy of Rajabi and Witt (2022) to the GSEMO, the expected runtime also improves by a factor of at least $k^{ฮฉ(k)}$ and surpasses the heavy-tailed GSEMO by a small polynomial factor in $k$. Via an experimental analysis, we show that these asymptotic differences are visible already for small problem sizes: A factor-$5$ speed-up from heavy-tailed mutation and a factor-$10$ speed-up from stagnation detection can be observed already for jump size~$4$ and problem sizes between $10$ and $50$. Overall, our results show that the ideas recently developed to aid single-objective evolutionary algorithms to cope with local optima can be effectively employed also in multiobjective optimization.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
๐ Similar Papers
In the same crypt โ Neural & Evolutionary
๐ฎ
๐ฎ
The Ethereal
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Deep Learning using Rectified Linear Units (ReLU)
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Generative Adversarial Text to Image Synthesis
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Regularized Evolution for Image Classifier Architecture Search
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Temporal Ensembling for Semi-Supervised Learning
๐
๐
Old Age
Learning Structured Sparsity in Deep Neural Networks
Died the same way โ ๐ป Ghosted
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted