Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Making a statistical comparison of meta-heuristic multi-objective optimization algorithms is crucial for identifying the strengths and weaknesses of a newly proposed algorithm. Currently, state-of-the-art comparison approaches involve user-preference-based selection of a single quality indicator or an ensemble of quality indicators as a comparison metric. Using these quality indicators, high-dimensional data is transformed into one-dimensional data. By doing this, information contained in the high-dimensional space can be lost, which will affect the results of the comparison. To avoid losing this information, we propose a novel ranking scheme that compares the distributions of high-dimensional data. Experimental results show that the proposed approach reduces potential information loss when statistical significance is not observed in high-dimensional data. Consequently, the selection of a quality indicator is required only in cases when statistical significance is observed in high-dimensional data. With this the cases that are affected by the user preference selection are reduced.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eftimov et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: