One of the most common approaches for multiobjective optimization is to generate a solution set that well approximates the whole Pareto-optimal frontier to facilitate the later decision-making process. However, how to evaluate and compare the quality of different solution sets remains challenging. Existing measures typically require additional problem knowledge and information, such as a reference point or a substituted set of the Pareto-optimal frontier. In this paper, we propose a quality measure, called dominance move (DoM), to compare solution sets generated by multiobjective optimizers. Given two solution sets, DoM measures the minimum sum of move distances for one set to weakly Pareto dominate the other set. DoM can be seen as a natural reflection of the difference between two solutions, capturing all aspects of solution sets' quality, being compliant with Pareto dominance, and does not need any additional problem knowledge and parameters. We present an exact method to calculate the DoM in the biobjective case. We show the necessary condition of constructing the optimal partition for a solution set's minimum move, and accordingly propose an efficient algorithm to recursively calculate the DoM. Finally, DoM is evaluated on several groups of artificial and real test cases as well as by a comparison with two well-established quality measures.
The HV indicator has good theoretical properties @cite_21 and can give a comprehensive evaluation of a solution set in terms of both convergence and diversity. While the computational complexity of calculating HV increases exponentially with the number of objectives, the Monte Carlo sampling method can provide a good balance between accuracy and running time @cite_44 @cite_13 . However, the HV indicator is sensitive to the choice of the reference point. How to choose a proper reference point is not trivial and different reference points can lead to inconsistent evaluation results @cite_38 . Take two solution sets ( @math and @math ) in Figure as an example. When the reference point is set to @math ( Figure (a) ), @math . When the reference point is @math ( Figure (b) ), @math .
@cite_44 @cite_38 @cite_21 @cite_13
2144646757 1989307896 2138309709 2045569659
We propose a new Monte Carlo method, based on dynamic importance sampling, to estimate the probability that a given set of nodes is connected in a graph (or network) where each link is failed with a given probability. The method generates the link states one by one, using a sampling strategy that approximates an ideal zero-variance importance sampling scheme. The approximation is based on minimal cuts in subgraphs. In an asymptotic rare-event regime where failure probability becomes very small, we prove that the relative error of our estimator remains bounded, and even converges to 0 under additional conditions, when the unreliability of individual links converges to 0. The empirical performance of the new sampling scheme is illustrated by examples. In this paper we propose a general framework for the uncertainty quantification of quantities of interest for high-contrast single-phase flow problems. It is based on the generalized multiscale finite element method (GMsFEM) and multilevel Monte Carlo (MLMC) methods. The former provides a hierarchy of approximations of different resolution, whereas the latter gives an efficient way to estimate quantities of interest using samples on different levels. The number of basis functions in the online GMsFEM stage can be varied to determine the solution resolution and the computational cost, and to efficiently generate samples at different levels. In particular, it is cheap to generate samples on coarse grids but with low resolution, and it is expensive to generate samples on fine grids with high accuracy. By suitably choosing the number of samples at different levels, one can leverage the expensive computation in larger fine-grid spaces toward smaller coarse-grid spaces, while retaining the accuracy of the final Monte Carlo estimate. Further, we describe a multilevel Markov chain Monte Carlo method, which sequentially screens the proposal with different levels of approximations and reduces the number of evaluations required on fine grids, while combining the samples at different levels to arrive at an accurate estimate. The framework seamlessly integrates the multiscale features of the GMsFEM with the multilevel feature of the MLMC methods following the work in [26], and our numerical experiments illustrate its efficiency and accuracy in comparison with standard Monte Carlo estimates. SUMMARY A generalization of the sampling method introduced by (1953) is presented along with an exposition of the relevant theory, techniques of application and methods and difficulties of assessing the error in Monte Carlo estimates. Examples of the methods, including the generation of random orthogonal matrices and potential applications of the methods to numerical problems arising in statistics, are discussed. For numerical problems in a large number of dimensions, Monte Carlo methods are often more efficient than conventional numerical methods. However, implementation of the Monte Carlo methods requires sampling from high dimensional probability distributions and this may be very difficult and expensive in analysis and computer time. General methods for sampling from, or estimating expectations with respect to, such distributions are as follows. (i) If possible, factorize the distribution into the product of one-dimensional conditional distributions from which samples may be obtained. (ii) Use importance sampling, which may also be used for variance reduction. That is, in order to evaluate the integral J = X) p(x)dx = Ev(f), where p(x) is a probability density function, instead of obtaining independent samples XI, ..., Xv from p(x) and using the estimate J, = Zf(xi) N, we instead obtain the sample from a distribution with density q(x) and use the estimate J2 = Y f(xj)p(x1) q(xj)N . This may be advantageous if it is easier to sample from q(x) thanp(x), but it is a difficult method to use in a large number of dimensions, since the values of the weights w(xi) = p(x1) q(xj) for reasonable values of N may all be extremely small, or a few may be extremely large. In estimating the probability of an event A, however, these difficulties may not be as serious since the only values of w(x) which are important are those for which x -A. Since the methods proposed by Trotter & Tukey (1956) for the estimation of conditional expectations require the use of importance sampling, the same difficulties may be encountered in their use. (iii) Use a simulation technique; that is, if it is difficult to sample directly from p(x) or if p(x) is unknown, sample from some distribution q(y) and obtain the sample x values as some function of the corresponding y values. If we want samples from the conditional dis Monte Carlo importance sampling for evaluating numerical integration is discussed. We consider a parametric family of sampling distributions and propose the use of the sampling distribution estimated by maximum likelihood. The proposed method of importance sampling using the estimated sampling distribution is shown to improve the asymptotic variance of the ordinary method using the true sampling distribution. The argument is closely related to the discussion of the paradox in Henmi & Eguchi (2004). We focus on a condition under which the estimated integration value obtained by the proposed method has asymptotic zero variance. Copyright 2007, Oxford University Press.