"However, it is impossible to obtain points on non-convex portions of the Pareto front" OP said that single element of Pareto Point would be enough. For non-convex Pareto sets and "smooth" traversing Pareto sets see, for example http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Admin/PUB/Documents/WP-79-066.pdf A.L. -----Original Message----- From: Marco Zimmerling [mailto:marco_at_binaervarianz.de] Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 3:38 AM To: eclipse-clp-users_at_lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [eclipse-clp-users] Pareto Optimality + Branch and Bound? Hi Philipp, I'm not aware of any ECLiPSe framework for Pareto front generation/approximation. As Andrzej suggested, one of the most common methods is the weighted sum approach. Assuming two objective functions f1(X) and f2(X), with X being the vector of decision variables, the single criteria problem becomes f(X) = w1*f1(X) + w2*f2(X), where w1 and w2 are weights that *should* reflect the importance of each objective. Typically, one assumes w1 + w2 = 1. By solving this problem for different combinations of w1 and w2, you can generate different Pareto optimal points. However, it is impossible to obtain points on non-convex portions of the Pareto front, and it is often difficult to generate a smooth Pareto front (i.e., without holes). So it is worthwhile to look into other approach as well. The article "Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering" by Marler and Arora (Struct Multidics Optim 26, pp. 369-395, 2004) provides a good overview of multiobjective optimization methods, including a discussion of pros and cons. Another branch of research uses evolutionary methods to find good approximations of the Pareto front. The optimization problem is treated as a black box; the focus lies on efficient stochastic search methods. If you want to get a feeling: http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/sop/publicationListFiles/zlb2004a.pdf Marco Andrzej Lewandowski wrote: > Convert to standard optimization problem (i.e. single criteria) using > weighted sum of individual criteria > > A.L. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Philipp Marcus [mailto:marcus_at_cip.ifi.lmu.de] > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 4:13 PM > To: eclipse-clp-users_at_lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: [eclipse-clp-users] Pareto Optimality + Branch and Bound? > > Hi, > > I have a COP with two cost variables and I'm searching for a pareto > optimal solution. Though it would be nice to get the complete pareto > front, I'd already be happy with *one* pareto optimal value. Is there a > framework I could use? If not so, do you have any suggestions how this > could be implemented? > > Best regards, > Philipp > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > _______________________________________________ > ECLiPSe-CLP-Users mailing list > ECLiPSe-CLP-Users_at_lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/eclipse-clp-users > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > _______________________________________________ > ECLiPSe-CLP-Users mailing list > ECLiPSe-CLP-Users_at_lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/eclipse-clp-users > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ ECLiPSe-CLP-Users mailing list ECLiPSe-CLP-Users_at_lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/eclipse-clp-usersReceived on Thu Apr 29 2010 - 12:51:14 CEST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Feb 02 2012 - 02:31:58 CET