Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

Ranking Constraints via Topological Dual-Directional Search in Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization

About

Existing evolutionary algorithms for Constrained Multi-objective Optimization Problems (CMOPs) typically treat all constraints uniformly, overlooking their distinct geometric relationships with the true Constrained Pareto Front (CPF). In reality, constraints play different roles: some directly shape the final CPF, some create infeasible obstacles, while others are irrelevant. To exploit this insight, we propose a novel algorithm named RCCMO, which sequentially performs unconstrained exploration, single-constraint exploitation, and full-constraint refinement. The core innovation of RCCMO lies in a constraint prioritization method derived from these geometric insights, seamlessly coupled with a unique dual-directional search mechanism. Specifically, RCCMO first prioritizes constraints that constitute the final CPF, approaching them from the evolutionary direction (optimizing objectives) to locate the CPF directly shaped by single-constraint boundaries. Subsequently, for constraints that merely hinder the population's progress, RCCMO searches from the anti-evolutionary direction (targeting the infeasible boundaries where hindering constraints intersect with the CPF) to effectively discover how these constraints obstruct and form the final CPF. Meanwhile, irrelevant constraints are intentionally bypassed. Furthermore, a series of specialized mechanisms are proposed to accelerate the algorithm's execution, reduce heuristic misjudgments, and dynamically adjust search directions in real time. Extensive experiments on 5 benchmark test suites and 29 real-world CMOPs demonstrate that RCCMO significantly outperforms seven state-of-the-art algorithms.

Ruiqing Sun, Dawei Feng, Sheng Qi, Xing Zhou, Lianghao Li, Bo Ding, Yijie Wang, Rui Wang, Huaimin Wang• 2026

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Constrained Multi-objective OptimizationLIRCMOP
Avg. Rank1.57
17
Constrained Multi-objective OptimizationSDC
Average Rank1.87
17
Constrained Multi-objective OptimizationZXH_CF
Avg. Rank2.19
17
Constrained Multi-objective OptimizationDOC
Average Rank2.44
17
Constrained Multi-objective OptimizationDASCMOP
Avg Rank3.11
17
Constrained Multi-objective OptimizationOverall Summary across all suites
Overall Average Rank2.14
8
Multi-Objective OptimizationRWMOP
Avg. Rank3.21
8
Showing 7 of 7 rows

Other info

Follow for update