IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/oropre/v56y2008i2p411-424.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diversity Maximization Approach for Multiobjective Optimization

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Masin

    (Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, Technion---Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 32000, Israel)

  • Yossi Bukchin

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel)

Abstract

One of the most common approaches for multiobjective optimization is to generate the whole or partial efficient frontier and then decide about the preferred solution in a higher-level decision-making process. In this paper, a new method for generating the efficient frontier for multiobjective problems is developed, called the diversity maximization approach (DMA). This approach is capable of solving mixed-integer and combinatorial problems. The DMA finds Pareto optimal solutions by maximizing a proposed diversity measure and guarantees generating the complete set of efficient points. Given a subset of the efficient frontier, DMA finds the next Pareto optimal solution which, combined with the existing ones, yields the most diversified subset of efficient points. This solution is defined as the most diverse solution . In fact, it aims to maximize the distance between the new efficient point and the closest point in the given subset of the efficient frontier. The proposed approach can be applied to any problem that can be solved for the single-objective case. We can use the DMA by solving directly a modified version of the mixed-integer programming (MIP) formulation of the multiobjective problem. In this case, the Pareto optimal solutions are found sequentially in an iterative way. Consequently, as we terminate the procedure before completion, a partial efficient frontier is available. The diversity measure assures that in every stage of the procedure, the partial efficient frontier is well diversified. This partial efficient frontier can be perceived as a filtered set of the complete efficient frontier and can be used by the decision maker in case the complete efficient frontier contains too many points. An additional way of using DMA is by incorporating it in a problem oriented branch-and-bound algorithm. Detailed examples of both approaches are given.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Masin & Yossi Bukchin, 2008. "Diversity Maximization Approach for Multiobjective Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(2), pages 411-424, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:56:y:2008:i:2:p:411-424
    DOI: 10.1287/opre.1070.0413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.1070.0413
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/opre.1070.0413?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Duan & Yang, Jian-Bo & Biswal, M. P., 1999. "Quantitative parametric connections between methods for generating noninferior solutions in multiobjective optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 84-99, August.
    2. Bukchin, Joseph & Masin, Michael, 2004. "Multi-objective design of team oriented assembly systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 326-352, July.
    3. Yun, Y. B. & Nakayama, H. & Tanino, T. & Arakawa, M., 2001. "Generation of efficient frontiers in multi-objective optimization problems by generalized data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(3), pages 586-595, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Bergman & Merve Bodur & Carlos Cardonha & Andre A. Cire, 2022. "Network Models for Multiobjective Discrete Optimization," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 990-1005, March.
    2. Altekin, F. Tevhide & Bukchin, Yossi, 2022. "A multi-objective optimization approach for exploring the cost and makespan trade-off in additive manufacturing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 301(1), pages 235-253.
    3. Thomas Stidsen & Kim Allan Andersen & Bernd Dammann, 2014. "A Branch and Bound Algorithm for a Class of Biobjective Mixed Integer Programs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 1009-1032, April.
    4. Miri Gilenson & Hussein Naseraldin & Liron Yedidsion, 2019. "An approximation scheme for the bi-scenario sum of completion times trade-off problem," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 289-304, June.
    5. Jornada, Daniel & Leon, V. Jorge, 2016. "Robustness methodology to aid multiobjective decision making in the electricity generation capacity expansion problem to minimize cost and water withdrawal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1089-1108.
    6. Özarık, Sami Serkan & Lokman, Banu & Köksalan, Murat, 2020. "Distribution based representative sets for multi-objective integer programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(2), pages 632-643.
    7. Huang, He & Gao, Song, 2012. "Optimal paths in dynamic networks with dependent random link travel times," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 579-598.
    8. Yu Nie & Xing Wu & Tito Homem-de-Mello, 2012. "Optimal Path Problems with Second-Order Stochastic Dominance Constraints," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 561-587, December.
    9. Ceyhan, Gökhan & Köksalan, Murat & Lokman, Banu, 2019. "Finding a representative nondominated set for multi-objective mixed integer programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(1), pages 61-77.
    10. Lou, Youcheng & Wang, Shouyang, 2016. "Approximate representation of the Pareto frontier in multiparty negotiations: Decentralized methods and privacy preservation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(3), pages 968-976.
    11. Sophie N. Parragh & Fabien Tricoire, 2019. "Branch-and-Bound for Bi-objective Integer Programming," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 805-822, October.
    12. Doğan, Ilgın & Lokman, Banu & Köksalan, Murat, 2022. "Representing the nondominated set in multi-objective mixed-integer programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 296(3), pages 804-818.
    13. Stacey Faulkenberg & Margaret Wiecek, 2012. "Generating equidistant representations in biobjective programming," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 1173-1210, April.
    14. Daniel Jornada & V. Jorge Leon, 2020. "Filtering Algorithms for Biobjective Mixed Binary Linear Optimization Problems with a Multiple-Choice Constraint," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 57-73, January.
    15. Cacchiani, Valentina & D’Ambrosio, Claudia, 2017. "A branch-and-bound based heuristic algorithm for convex multi-objective MINLPs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(3), pages 920-933.
    16. Raimundo, Marcos M. & Ferreira, Paulo A.V. & Von Zuben, Fernando J., 2020. "An extension of the non-inferior set estimation algorithm for many objectives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(1), pages 53-66.
    17. Evren, Özgür & Ok, Efe A., 2011. "On the multi-utility representation of preference relations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 554-563.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tsionas, Mike G., 2019. "Multi-objective optimization using statistical models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(1), pages 364-378.
    2. Becker, Christian & Scholl, Armin, 2006. "A survey on problems and methods in generalized assembly line balancing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(3), pages 694-715, February.
    3. Durmusoglu, M. Bulent & Kulak, Osman, 2008. "A methodology for the design of office cells using axiomatic design principles," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 633-652, August.
    4. Gabriele Eichfelder, 2009. "Scalarizations for adaptively solving multi-objective optimization problems," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 249-273, November.
    5. Zebian, Hussam & Mitsos, Alexander, 2014. "A split concept for HRSG (heat recovery steam generators) with simultaneous area reduction and performance improvement," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 421-431.
    6. Lin, Rung-Chuan & Sir, Mustafa Y. & Pasupathy, Kalyan S., 2013. "Multi-objective simulation optimization using data envelopment analysis and genetic algorithm: Specific application to determining optimal resource levels in surgical services," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 881-892.
    7. Rifat G. Ozdemir & Ugur Cinar & Eren Kalem & Onur Ozcelik, 2016. "Sub-assembly detection and line balancing using fuzzy goal programming approach," International Journal of Data Analysis Techniques and Strategies, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1), pages 65-86.
    8. Gao, Jianjun & Xiong, Yan & Li, Duan, 2016. "Dynamic mean-risk portfolio selection with multiple risk measures in continuous-time," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(2), pages 647-656.
    9. Kourosh Ranjbar & Hamid Khaloozadeh & Aghileh Heydari, 2020. "A novel mixed Spider’s web initial solution and data envelopment analysis for solving multi-objective optimization problems," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(1), pages 193-208, March.
    10. Thomas Stidsen & Kim Allan Andersen & Bernd Dammann, 2014. "A Branch and Bound Algorithm for a Class of Biobjective Mixed Integer Programs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 1009-1032, April.
    11. Yeboon Yun & Hirotaka Nakayama & Min Yoon, 2016. "Generation of Pareto optimal solutions using generalized DEA and PSO," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 64(1), pages 49-61, January.
    12. Boysen, Nils & Fliedner, Malte & Scholl, Armin, 2008. "Assembly line balancing: Which model to use when," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 509-528, February.
    13. Mishra, Savita, 2007. "Weighting method for bi-level linear fractional programming problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(1), pages 296-302, November.
    14. Boysen, Nils & Fliedner, Malte & Scholl, Armin, 2007. "A classification of assembly line balancing problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(2), pages 674-693, December.
    15. Bukchin, Joseph & Masin, Michael, 2004. "Multi-objective design of team oriented assembly systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 326-352, July.
    16. Ömer Faruk Yılmaz & Büşra Yazıcı, 2022. "Tactical level strategies for multi-objective disassembly line balancing problem with multi-manned stations: an optimization model and solution approaches," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 319(2), pages 1793-1843, December.
    17. Kleine, A., 2004. "A general model framework for DEA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 17-23, February.
    18. Guschinskaya, Olga & Dolgui, Alexandre, 2009. "Comparison of exact and heuristic methods for a transfer line balancing problem," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 276-286, August.
    19. Pubudu L. W. Jayasekara & Andrew C. Pangia & Margaret M. Wiecek, 2023. "On solving parametric multiobjective quadratic programs with parameters in general locations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(1), pages 123-172, January.
    20. Yun, Y. B. & Nakayama, H. & Arakawa, M., 2004. "Multiple criteria decision making with generalized DEA and an aspiration level method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 697-706, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:56:y:2008:i:2:p:411-424. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.