2011
DOI: 10.1080/09544828.2011.630656
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Handling changes of performance requirements in multi-objective problems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Note that the choice of the number of test points near a solution x 0 that have to be chosen in order to find a search direction merely depends on the number of objectives involved in the MOP, and not on the dimension of the parameter space. Finally, we intend to utilize the DS/DDS in other applications, e.g., in the context of changing market demands as described in [2].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note that the choice of the number of test points near a solution x 0 that have to be chosen in order to find a search direction merely depends on the number of objectives involved in the MOP, and not on the dimension of the parameter space. Finally, we intend to utilize the DS/DDS in other applications, e.g., in the context of changing market demands as described in [2].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are only a few papers that consider switching cost. In [1,9,20,28], switching cost was considered as an objective in multi-objective problems. However, all of these works considered the switching cost as a separable and independent objective from the optimality objective function and the connection between these two objectives was not considered.…”
Section: Methods Considering Switching Costmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A multi-objective problem was deined which considered the cost of the adaptation and the optimality while the adaptation takes place. In [1], the need for rapid, low-cost changes in a design, in response to changes in performance requirements, within multi-objective problems, was investigated. An algorithm called ROOT⁄SC [9] was designed for ROOT.…”
Section: Methods Considering Switching Costmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different concepts are then compared in the bi-objective domain of optimality-variability, to support a selection of one of them. Avigad et al (2011) introduced a different approach for concept-based optimization. In this study they considered the versatility of a family of designs to satisfy several requirements, expressed as a set of ROIs.…”
Section: Set Evaluation In Concept-based Optimizationmentioning
confidence: 99%