Increasing selective pressure towards the best compromise in evolutionary multiobjective optimization: The extended NOSGA method

Fernández, Eduardo; Lopez, Edy; López, Fernándo; Coello, Carlos A. Coello

doi:10.1016/j.ins.2010.09.007

Cited by 64 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…6.Those in which the DM supplies the model's parameters to build a fuzzy outranking relation (e.g. [15,56]). 7.The construction of a desirability function which is based on the assignment of some desirability thresholds (e.g.…”

Section: A Brief Outline and Some Criticisms Of Previous Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The proposal by Fernandez et al [10,15] is based on the relational system of preferences described in [58] by Roy. A crucial model is the degree of credibility of the statement 'x is at least as good as y'.…”

Section: The Best Portfolio In the Sense Of Fernandez Et Al [10]mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is represented as σ(x, y) and could be calculated using proven methods from the literature, such as ELECTRE [59] and PROMETHEE [60]. Considering the parameters λ, β, and ǫ (0 ≤ ǫ ≤ β ≤ λ and λ > 0.5), the proposal in [10,15] identifies one of the following relations for each pair of portfolios (x, y):…”

Section: The Best Portfolio In the Sense Of Fernandez Et Al [10]mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Besides the weak outranking, the net flow score is another measure used in [10,15] to identify the DM's preferences in the non-strictly-outranked frontier. It can be defined as:…”

Section: K-preference: This Represents a State Of Doubt Betweenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Section 2 summarizes the most-widely accepted optimization model of the portfolio problem. Section 3 briefly reviews proposals for incorporating DM preferences in multi-objective optimization metaheuristics, and on this background, the method by Fernandez et al [10,15] is detailed. Our proposal is presented in Section 4, followed by test examples and comparisons with other approaches (Section 5).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Many-Objective Portfolio Optimization of Interdependent Projects with ‘a priori’ Incorporation of Decision-Maker Preferences

Cruz¹,

Fernández²,

Gómez³

et al. 2014

Appl. Math. Inf. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Project portfolio selection is one of the most important problems faced by any organization. The decision process involves multiple conflicting criteria, and has been commonly addressed by implementing a two-phase procedure. The first step identifies the efficient solution set; the second step supports the decision maker in selecting only one portfolio solution from the efficient set. However, several recent studies show the advantages gained by optimizing towards a region of interest (according to the decision maker's preferences) instead of approximating the complete Pareto set. However, these works have not faced synergism and its variants, such as cannibalization and redundancy. In this paper we introduce a new approach called Non-Outranked Ant Colony Optimization, which optimizes interdependent project portfolios with a priori articulation of decision-maker preferences based on an outranking model. Several experimental tests show the advantages of our proposal over the two-phase approach, providing reasonable evidence of its potential for solving real-world high-scale problems with many objectives.

show abstract

Section: A Brief Outline and Some Criticisms Of Previous Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Best Portfolio In the Sense Of Fernandez Et Al [10]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Best Portfolio In the Sense Of Fernandez Et Al [10]mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Besides the weak outranking, the net flow score is another measure used in [10,15] to identify the DM's preferences in the non-strictly-outranked frontier. It can be defined as:…”

Section: K-preference: This Represents a State Of Doubt Betweenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations