Using Comparative Preference Statements in Hypervolume-Based Interactive Multiobjective Optimization

International audienceThe objective functions in multiobjective optimization problems are often non-linear, noisy, or not available in a closed form and evolutionary multiobjective optimization (EMO) algorithms have been shown to be well applicable in this case. Here, our objective is to facilitate interactive decision making by saving function evaluations outside the "interesting" regions of the search space within a hypervolume-based EMO algorithm. We focus on a basic model where the Decision Maker (DM) is always asked to pick the most desirable solution among a set. In addition to the scenario where this solution is chosen directly, we present the alternative to specify preferences via a set of so-called comparative preference statements. Examples on standard test problems show the working principles, the competitiveness, and the drawbacks of the proposed algorithm in comparison with the recent iTDEA algorithm

Quality Indicators for Preference-based Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization Using a Reference Point: A Review and Analysis

Some quality indicators have been proposed for benchmarking preference-based evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithms using a reference point. Although a systematic review and analysis of the quality indicators are helpful for both benchmarking and practical decision-making, neither has been conducted. In this context, first, this paper reviews existing regions of interest and quality indicators for preference-based evolutionary multi-objective optimization using the reference point. We point out that each quality indicator was designed for a different region of interest. Then, this paper investigates the properties of the quality indicators. We demonstrate that an achievement scalarizing function value is not always consistent with the distance from a solution to the reference point in the objective space. We observe that the regions of interest can be significantly different depending on the position of the reference point and the shape of the Pareto front. We identify undesirable properties of some quality indicators. We also show that the ranking of preference-based evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithms depends on the choice of quality indicators