Pareto-optimal Solutions for Multi-objective Optimal Control Problems using Hybrid IWO/PSO Algorithm

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Department of Mathematics, Payame Noor University, P.O.Box 19395-3697, Tehran, Iran

2 School of Mathematics and Computer Science, Damghan University, Damghan, Iran

3 Department of Mathematics, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran


Heuristic optimization provides a robust and efficient approach for
extracting approximate solutions of multi-objective problems because of their
capability to evolve a set of non-dominated solutions distributed along the
Pareto frontier. The convergence rate and suitable diversity of solutions are
of great importance for multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. The focus of
this paper is on a hybrid method combining two heuristic optimization techniques, Invasive Weed Optimization (IWO) and Particle Swarm Optimization
(PSO), to find approximate solutions for multi-objective optimal control problems (MOCPs). In the proposed method, the process of dispersal has been
modified in the MOIWO. This modification will increase the exploration power
of the weeds and reduces the search space gradually during the iteration process. Thus, the convergence rate and diversity of solutions along the Pareto
frontier have been promote. Finally, the ability of the proposed algorithm is
evaluated and compared with conventional NSGA-II and NSIWO algorithms
using three practical MOCPs. The results show that the proposed algorithm
has better performance than others in terms of computing time, convergence
and diversity.


  1. M. Bianchi, Adaptive modellbasierte prdiktive regelung einer kleinwrmepumpen anlage, PhD Thesis, ETH, Zurich (2006).
  2. A.H. Borzabadi, M. Hasanabadi, and N. Sadjadi, Approximate Pareto optimal solutions of multi objective optimal control problems by evolutionary algorithms, Journal of Control and Optimization in Applied Mathematics, 1(1), 1–19 (2015).
  3. C.A. Coello, A comprehensive survey of evolutionary-based multi-objective optimization techniques, Knowledge and Information Systems: An International Journal, 1(3), 269–308 (1999).
  4. C.A. Coello and M.S. Lechuga, MOPSO: A proposal for multiple objective particle swarm optimization, In Proceeding Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Honolulu, HI., 1, 1051–056 (2002).
  5. I. Das and J.E. Dennis, Normal-boundary intersection: a new method for generating the Pareto surface in nonlinear multicriteria optimization problems, SIAM Journal on Optimization, 8(3), 631–657 (1998).
  6. K. Deb, Multi-objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms, Wiley, 16 (2001).
  7. K. Deb, A. Pratap, and S. Agarwal, T. Meyarivan, A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(2), 182–197 (2002).
  8. M. Erickson, A. Mayer, and J. Horn, The niched Pareto genetic algorithm 2 applied to the design of ground water remediation systems, In EMO, 681–695 (2001).
  9. C.M. Fonseca, Multiobjective genetic algorithms with application to control engineering problems. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, U.K. (1995).
  10. J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, Particle swarm optimization, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, 4, 1942–1948, (1995).
  11. S. Kukkonen and K. Deb, Improved Pruning of Non-Dominated Solutions Based on Crowding Distance for Bi-Objective Optimization Problems, IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, 132, 91–98 (2007).
  12. D. Kundu, K. Suresh, S. Ghosh, S. Das, and B.K. Panigrahi, Multi-objective optimization with artificial weed colonies, Journal of Information Science, 181, 2441–2454 (2011).
  13. F. Logist and J. Van Impe, Multiple objective optimization of cyclic chemical systems with distributed parameters. Control. Appl. Optim., 7, 295–300 (2009).
  14. F. Logist, B. Houska, M. Diehl, and J. Van Impe, Fast Pareto set generation for nonlinear optimal control problems with multiple objectives, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 42, 591–603 (2010).
  15. F. Logist, P.M.M. Van Erdeghem, and J. Van Impe, Efficient deterministic multiple objective optimal control of (bio)chemical processes, Chem. Eng. Sci, 64, 2527–2538 (2009).
  16. A.L. Jaimes, L.V. Santana Quintero, and C.C.A Coello, Ranking methods in manyobjective evolutionary algorithms, Nature-Inspired Algorithms for Optimisation, 413–434 (2009).
  17. A. Messac, A. Ismail-Yahaya, and C. A. Mattson, The normalized normal constraint method for generating the Pareto frontier, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 25(2), 86–98 (2003).
  18. R. Mehrabian and C. Lucas, A novel numerical optimization algorithm inspired from weed colonization, Ecological Informatics, 1(4), 355–366 (2006).
  19. H. Modares and M.B. Naghibi Sistani, Solving nonlinear optimal control problems using a hybrid IPSO-SQP algorithm, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 24, 476–484 (2011).
  20. A.H. Nikoofard, H. Hajimirsadeghi, A. Rahi-mi-Kian, and C. Lucas, Multiobjective invasive weed optimization: application to analysis of Pareto improvement models in electricity markets, Applied Soft Computing, 12, 100–112 (2012).
  21. H. Ohno, E. Nakanishi,and T. Takamatsu, Optimal control of a semibatch fermentation, Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 18 , 847–864 (1976).
  22. N. Patel and N. Padhiyar, Modified genetic algorithm using Box Complex method: application to optimal control problems, J. Process Control, 26, 35–50 (2015).
  23. N. Patel and N. Padhiyar, Multi-objective dynamic optimization study offed-batch bioreactor, Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 119, 160–170 (2017).
  24. S. Park and W. Fred Ramirez, Optimal production of secretedprotein in fed-batch reactors, AIChE J., 34, 1550–1558 (1988).
  25. V. Pareto, Cours d’conomie Politique, F. Rouge, Lausanne, 97 (1896).
  26. D. Sarkar and J.M. Modak, Pareto-optimal solutions for multi-objective optimization of fed-batch bioreactors using nondominated sorting genetic algorithm, Chemical Engineering Science, 60(2), 481–492 (2005).
  27. N. Srinivas and K. Deb, Multi-objective function optimization using nondominated sorting genetic algorithms, Evolutionary Computations, 2(3), 221–248 (1995).
  28. J.D. Schaffer, Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms, Proceedings of the First International Conference of Genetic Algorithms, Pittsburgh, 93–100 (1985).
  29. Y. Shi and R.C. Eberhart, A modified particle swarm optimizer, in: Proceedings of the IEEE Congress of Evolutionary Computation, 69–73 (1998).
  30. F. Sun, W. Du, R. Qi, F. Qian, and W. Zhong, A hybrid improved genetic algorithmand its application in dynamic optimization problems of chemical processes, Chin. J. Chem. Eng., 21, 144–154 (2013).
  31. M. Vasile and L. Ricciardi, A Direct Memetic Approach to the Solution of MultiObjective Optimal Control Problems, IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (2016).
  32. Y. Zhou, H. Chen, and G. Zhou, Invasive weed optimization algorithm for optimization no-idle flow shop scheduling problem. Neurocomputing, 137, 285–292 (2014).
  33. Y. Zhang, D.W. Gong, and N. Gong, Multi-objective optimization problems using cooperative evolvement particle swarm optimizer, J. Comput. Theor. Nanosci., 10(3), 655–663 (2013).
  34. X. Zhang, J. Xu, and G. Cui, Research on Invasive Weed Optimization based on the cultural framework. 3rd International Conference on Bio-Inspired Computing: Theories and Applications, IEEE Conference Publications, 129–134 (2008).
  35. E. Zitzler and L. Thiele, Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms: A comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 3, 257–271 (1999).
  36. E. Zitzler, M. Laumanns, and L. Thiele, SPEA2: Improving the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm, Zurich, Switzerland: Swiss Federal Institute Technology (2001).