Investigating Normalization in Preference-based Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization Using a Reference Point

Normalization of objectives plays a crucial role in evolutionary multi-objective optimization (EMO) to handle objective functions with different scales, which can be found in real-world problems. Although the effect of normalization methods on the performance of EMO algorithms has been investigated in the literature, that of preference-based EMO (PBEMO) algorithms is poorly understood. Since PBEMO aims to approximate a region of interest, its population generally does not cover the Pareto front in the objective space. This property may make normalization of objectives in PBEMO difficult. This paper investigates the effectiveness of three normalization methods in three representative PBEMO algorithms. We present a bounded archive-based method for approximating the nadir point. First, we demonstrate that the normalization methods in PBEMO perform significantly worse than that in conventional EMO in terms of approximating the ideal point, nadir point, and range of the PF. Then, we show that PBEMO requires normalization of objectives on problems with differently scaled objectives. Our results show that there is no clear "best normalization method" in PBEMO, but an external archive-based method performs relatively well

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