Runtime Analysis of the SMS-EMOA for Many-Objective Optimization

The widely used multiobjective optimizer NSGA-II was recently proven to have considerable difficulties in many-objective optimization. In contrast, experimental results in the literature show a good performance of the SMS-EMOA, which can be seen as a steady-state NSGA-II that uses the hypervolume contribution instead of the crowding distance as the second selection criterion. This paper conducts the first rigorous runtime analysis of the SMS-EMOA for many-objective optimization. To this aim, we first propose a many-objective counterpart, the m-objective mOJZJ problem, of the bi-objective OJZJ benchmark, which is the first many-objective multimodal benchmark used in a mathematical runtime analysis. We prove that SMS-EMOA computes the full Pareto front of this benchmark in an expected number of $O(M^2 n^k)$ iterations, where $n$ denotes the problem size (length of the bit-string representation), $k$ the gap size (a difficulty parameter of the problem), and $M=(2n/m-2k+3)^{m/2}$ the size of the Pareto front. This result together with the existing negative result on the original NSGA-II shows that in principle, the general approach of the NSGA-II is suitable for many-objective optimization, but the crowding distance as tie-breaker has deficiencies. We obtain three additional insights on the SMS-EMOA. Different from a recent result for the bi-objective OJZJ benchmark, the stochastic population update often does not help for mOJZJ. It results in a $1/\Theta(\min\{Mk^{1/2}/2^{k/2},1\})$ speed-up, which is $\Theta(1)$ for large $m$ such as $m>k$. On the positive side, we prove that heavy-tailed mutation still results in a speed-up of order $k^{0.5+k-\beta}$. Finally, we conduct the first runtime analyses of the SMS-EMOA on the bi-objective OneMinMax and LOTZ benchmarks and show that it has a performance comparable to the GSEMO and the NSGA-II.

Theoretical Analyses of Evolutionary Algorithms on Time-Linkage OneMax with General Weights

Evolutionary computation has shown its superiority in dynamic optimization, but for the (dynamic) time-linkage problems, some theoretical studies have revealed the possible weakness of evolutionary computation. Since the theoretically analyzed time-linkage problem only considers the influence of an extremely strong negative time-linkage effect, it remains unclear whether the weakness also appears in problems with more general time-linkage effects. Besides, understanding in depth the relationship between time-linkage effect and algorithmic features is important to build up our knowledge of what algorithmic features are good at what kinds of problems. In this paper, we analyze the general time-linkage effect and consider the time-linkage OneMax with general weights whose absolute values reflect the strength and whose sign reflects the positive or negative influence. We prove that except for some small and positive time-linkage effects (that is, for weights $0$ and $1$), randomized local search (RLS) and (1+1)EA cannot converge to the global optimum with a positive probability. More precisely, for the negative time-linkage effect (for negative weights), both algorithms cannot efficiently reach the global optimum and the probability of failing to converge to the global optimum is at least $1-o(1)$. For the not so small positive time-linkage effect (positive weights greater than $1$), such a probability is at most $c+o(1)$ where $c$ is a constant strictly less than $1$.

Runtime Analysis for the NSGA-II: Proving, Quantifying, and Explaining the Inefficiency For Many Objectives

The NSGA-II is one of the most prominent algorithms to solve multi-objective optimization problems. Despite numerous successful applications, several studies have shown that the NSGA-II is less effective for larger numbers of objectives. In this work, we use mathematical runtime analyses to rigorously demonstrate and quantify this phenomenon. We show that even on the simple OneMinMax benchmark, where every solution is Pareto optimal, the NSGA-II also with large population sizes cannot compute the full Pareto front (objective vectors of all Pareto optima) in sub-exponential time when the number of objectives is at least three. Our proofs suggest that the reason for this unexpected behavior lies in the fact that in the computation of the crowding distance, the different objectives are regarded independently. This is not a problem for two objectives, where any sorting of a pair-wise incomparable set of solutions according to one objective is also such a sorting according to the other objective (in the inverse order).

Runtime Analysis for the NSGA-II: Proving, Quantifying, and Explaining the Inefficiency For Three or More Objectives

The NSGA-II is one of the most prominent algorithms to solve multi-objective optimization problems. Despite numerous successful applications and, very recently, also competitive mathematical performance guarantees, several studies have shown that the NSGA-II is less effective for larger numbers of objectives. In this work, we use mathematical runtime analyses to rigorously prove and quantify this phenomenon. We show that even on the simple OneMinMax benchmark, where every solution is Pareto optimal, the NSGA-II also with large population sizes cannot compute the full Pareto front (objective vectors of all Pareto optima) in sub-exponential time. Our proofs suggest that the reason for this unexpected behavior lies in the fact that in the computation of the crowding distance, the different objectives are regarded independently. This is not a problem for two objectives, where any sorting of a pair-wise incomparable set of solutions according to one objective is also such a sorting according to the other objective (in the inverse order).

From Understanding Genetic Drift to a Smart-Restart Mechanism for Estimation-of-Distribution Algorithms

Estimation-of-distribution algorithms (EDAs) are optimization algorithms that learn a distribution on the search space from which good solutions can be sampled easily. A key parameter of most EDAs is the sample size (population size). If the population size is too small, the update of the probabilistic model builds on few samples, leading to the undesired effect of genetic drift. Too large population sizes avoid genetic drift, but slow down the process. Building on a recent quantitative analysis of how the population size leads to genetic drift, we design a smart-restart mechanism for EDAs. By stopping runs when the risk for genetic drift is high, it automatically runs the EDA in good parameter regimes. Via a mathematical runtime analysis, we prove a general performance guarantee for this smart-restart scheme. This in particular shows that in many situations where the optimal (problem-specific) parameter values are known, the restart scheme automatically finds these, leading to the asymptotically optimal performance. We also conduct an extensive experimental analysis. On four classic benchmark problems, we clearly observe the critical influence of the population size on the performance, and we find that the smart-restart scheme leads to a performance close to the one obtainable with optimal parameter values. Our results also show that previous theory-based suggestions for the optimal population size can be far from the optimal ones, leading to a performance clearly inferior to the one obtained via the smart-restart scheme. We also conduct experiments with PBIL (cross-entropy algorithm) on two combinatorial optimization problems from the literature, the max-cut problem and the bipartition problem. Again, we observe that the smart-restart mechanism finds much better values for the population size than those suggested in the literature, leading to a much better performance.

Better Approximation Guarantees for the NSGA-II by Using the Current Crowding Distance

A recent runtime analysis (Zheng, Liu, Doerr (2022)) has shown that a variant of the NSGA-II algorithm can efficiently compute the full Pareto front of the OneMinMax problem when the population size is by a constant factor larger than the Pareto front, but that this is not possible when the population size is only equal to the Pareto front size. In this work, we analyze how well the NSGA-II approximates the Pareto front when it cannot compute the whole front. We observe experimentally and by mathematical means that already when the population size is half the Pareto front size, relatively large gaps in the Pareto front remain. The reason for this phenomenon is that the NSGA-II in the selection stage computes the crowding distance once and then repeatedly removes individuals with smallest crowding distance without updating the crowding distance after each removal. We propose an efficient way to implement the NSGA-II using the momentary crowding distance. In our experiments, this algorithm approximates the Pareto front much better than the previous version. We also prove that the gaps in the Pareto front are at most a constant factor larger than the theoretical minimum.

A First Mathematical Runtime Analysis of the Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II)

The non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II) is the most intensively used multi-objective evolutionary algorithm (MOEA) in real-world applications. However, in contrast to several simple MOEAs analyzed also via mathematical means, no such study exists for the NSGA-II so far. In this work, we show that mathematical runtime analyses are feasible also for the NSGA-II. As particular results, we prove that with a population size larger than the Pareto front size by a constant factor, the NSGA-II with two classic mutation operators and three different ways to select the parents satisfies the same asymptotic runtime guarantees as the SEMO and GSEMO algorithms on the basic OneMinMax and LOTZ benchmark functions. However, if the population size is only equal to the size of the Pareto front, then the NSGA-II cannot efficiently compute the full Pareto front (for an exponential number of iterations, the population will always miss a constant fraction of the Pareto front). Our experiments confirm the above findings.

Choosing the Right Algorithm With Hints From Complexity Theory

Choosing a suitable algorithm from the myriads of different search heuristics is difficult when faced with a novel optimization problem. In this work, we argue that the purely academic question of what could be the best possible algorithm in a certain broad class of black-box optimizers can give fruitful indications in which direction to search for good established optimization heuristics. We demonstrate this approach on the recently proposed DLB benchmark, for which the only known results are $O(n^3)$ runtimes for several classic evolutionary algorithms and an $O(n^2 \log n)$ runtime for an estimation-of-distribution algorithm. Our finding that the unary unbiased black-box complexity is only $O(n^2)$ suggests the Metropolis algorithm as an interesting candidate and we prove that it solves the DLB problem in quadratic time. Since we also prove that better runtimes cannot be obtained in the class of unary unbiased algorithms, we shift our attention to algorithms that use the information of more parents to generate new solutions. An artificial algorithm of this type having an $O(n \log n)$ runtime leads to the result that the significance-based compact genetic algorithm (sig-cGA) can solve the DLB problem also in time $O(n \log n)$. Our experiments show a remarkably good performance of the Metropolis algorithm, clearly the best of all algorithms regarded for reasonable problem sizes.

When Non-Elitism Meets Time-Linkage Problems

Many real-world applications have the time-linkage property, and the only theoretical analysis is recently given by Zheng, et al. (TEVC 2021) on their proposed time-linkage OneMax problem, OneMax$_{(0,1^n)}$. However, only two elitist algorithms (1+1)EA and ($\mu$+1)EA are analyzed, and it is unknown whether the non-elitism mechanism could help to escape the local optima existed in OneMax$_{(0,1^n)}$. In general, there are few theoretical results on the benefits of the non-elitism in evolutionary algorithms. In this work, we analyze on the influence of the non-elitism via comparing the performance of the elitist (1+$\lambda$)EA and its non-elitist counterpart (1,$\lambda$)EA. We prove that with probability $1-o(1)$ (1+$\lambda$)EA will get stuck in the local optima and cannot find the global optimum, but with probability $1$, (1,$\lambda$)EA can reach the global optimum and its expected runtime is $O(n^{3+c}\log n)$ with $\lambda=c \log_{\frac{e}{e-1}} n$ for the constant $c\ge 1$. Noting that a smaller offspring size is helpful for escaping from the local optima, we further resort to the compact genetic algorithm where only two individuals are sampled to update the probabilistic model, and prove its expected runtime of $O(n^3\log n)$. Our computational experiments also verify the efficiency of the two non-elitist algorithms.

Theoretical Analyses of Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms on Multi-Modal Objectives

Previous theory work on multi-objective evolutionary algorithms considers mostly easy problems that are composed of unimodal objectives. This paper takes a first step towards a deeper understanding of how evolutionary algorithms solve multi-modal multi-objective problems. We propose the OneJumpZeroJump problem, a bi-objective problem whose single objectives are isomorphic to the classic jump functions benchmark. We prove that the simple evolutionary multi-objective optimizer (SEMO) cannot compute the full Pareto front. In contrast, for all problem sizes~$n$ and all jump sizes $k \in [4..\frac n2 - 1]$, the global SEMO (GSEMO) covers the Pareto front in $\Theta((n-2k)n^{k})$ iterations in expectation. To improve the performance, we combine the GSEMO with two approaches, a heavy-tailed mutation operator and a stagnation detection strategy, that showed advantages in single-objective multi-modal problems. Runtime improvements of asymptotic order at least $k^{\Omega(k)}$ are shown for both strategies. Our experiments verify the {substantial} runtime gains already for moderate problem sizes. Overall, these results show that the ideas recently developed for single-objective evolutionary algorithms can be effectively employed also in multi-objective optimization.