The fastest known algorithm for calculating the hypervolume of a set of solutions to a multi-objective optimization problem is the HSO algorithm (hypervolume by slicing objectives). However, the performance of HSO for a given front varies a lot depending on the order in which it processes the objectives in that front. We present and evaluate two alternative heuristics that each attempt to identify a good order for processing the objectives of a given front. We show that both heuristics make a substantial difference to the performance of HSO for randomly-generated and benchmark data in 5-9 objectives, and that they both enable HSO to reliably avoid the worst-case performance for those fronts. The enhanced HSO enable the use of hypervolume with larger populations in more objectives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
While et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: