Comparative Analysis of Selection Hyper-Heuristics for Real-World Multi-Objective Optimization Problems

Abstract

As exact algorithms are unfeasible to solve real optimization problems, due to their computational complexity, meta-heuristics are usually used to solve them. However, choosing a meta-heuristic to solve a particular optimization problem is a non-trivial task, and often requires a time-consuming trial and error process. Hyper-heuristics, which are heuristics to choose heuristics, have been proposed as a means to both simplify and improve algorithm selection or configuration for optimization problems. This paper novel presents a novel cross-domain evaluation for multi-objective optimization: we investigate how four state-of-the-art online hyper-heuristics with different characteristics perform in order to find solutions for eighteen real-world multi-objective optimization problems. These hyper-heuristics were designed in previous studies and tackle the algorithm selection problem from different perspectives: Election-Based, based on Reinforcement Learning and based on a mathematical function. All studied hyper-heuristics control a set of five Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms (MOEAs) as Low-Level (meta-)Heuristics (LLHs) while finding solutions for the optimization problem. To our knowledge, this work is the first to deal conjointly with the following issues: (i) selection of meta-heuristics instead of simple operators (ii) focus on multi-objective optimization problems, (iii) experiments on real world problems and not just function benchmarks. In our experiments, we computed, for each algorithm execution, Hypervolume and IGD+ and compared the results considering the Kruskal–Wallis statistical test. Furthermore, we ranked all the tested algorithms considering three different Friedman Rankings to summarize the cross-domain analysis. Our results showed that hyper-heuristics have a better cross-domain performance than single meta-heuristics, which makes them excellent candidates for solving new multi-objective optimization problems.

A Decision-Making Tool for Algorithm Selection Based on a Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach to Solve Replenishment, Production and Distribution Planning Problems

“…Determine proximity coefficient CC i , which evaluates the rank order of all the alternatives A i according to their overall performance. The proximity coefficient is calculated as shown in Equation (21).…”

“…Step 5. It is followed to determine the closeness coefficient using Equation (21). CC i The obtained values represent the total score of each algorithm for a production planning problem.…”

“…The algorithm selection problem (ASP) is an active research area in many fields, such as operations research [19][20][21] and artificial intelligence (AI) [22,23]. For many decades, researchers have developed increasingly sophisticated techniques and algorithms to solve difficult optimization problems [18].…”

A Survey of Combined Heat and Power-Based Unit Commitment Problem: Optimization Algorithms, Case Studies, Challenges, and Future Directions

“…They comprise a set of methods that are motivated to automate the design of heuristic methods to solve the hard computational search. More details on this subject can be found in [87][88][89]. The algorithms applied in this category for the CHPbUCP are as follows:…”

Solving the Combined Heat and Power Economic Dispatch Problem in Different Scale Systems Using the Imperialist Competitive Harris Hawks Optimization Algorithm

“…Some early approaches developed before 2000 are automated heuristic sequencing, automated planning systems, automated parameter control in evolutionary algorithms, and automated learning of heuristic methods [77]. Further details on this subject can be found in [76][77][78].…”