X-14-081 Different Approaches for Solving Optimization Problems Using Interactive E-Learning Tools (original) (raw)

Abstract

Solving optimization problems, regardless of the scope, involves knowledge of mathematical apparatus based on the techniques and methods that are not always simple (differential calculus, operational research, etc.) and concepts of artificial intelligence, machine learning, evolutionary computing, graph theory. These problems are NP-complete and very often the optimization process targets more than one objective, at least two, and they can have an antagonist behavior. As an example, we can consider a simple car design: two objectives cost (production cost or fuel consumption) that should be minimized and performance (speed limit or reliability) which are to be maximized. Or, if we talk about a microprocessor design the multi-criteria analysis must targets: high performance, small integration area, small energy consumption having also constraints about thermal dissipation. Given the above, becomes more difficult to teach optimization methods, to communicate new concepts and skills in...

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (17)

  1. Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal S., Meyarivan, T., A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 182-197, 2002.
  2. Dorigo, M., Gambardella, L.M., Ant colony system: A cooperative learning approach to the Traveling Salesman Problem, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 53-66, 1997.
  3. Durillo, J.J., Nebro, A.J., Alba, E., The jMetal Framework for Multi-Objective Optimization: Design and Architecture, Congress of Evolutionary Computing, pp. 1-8, 2010.
  4. Eberhart, R.C., Kennedy, J., A new optimizer using particle swarm theory, In Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on micro machine and human science, vol. 43, New York, USA: IEEE, 1995.
  5. Gass, S., Saaty, T., Parametric Objective Function Part II. Operations Research, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 316-319, 1955.
  6. Geiger, M.J., Teaching Modern Heuristics in Combinatorial Optimization, Education for the 21st Century, vol. 210 of IFIP, pp. 65-74, Springer, 2006.
  7. Gellert, A., Calborean, H., Vintan, L., Florea, A., Multi-objective optimisations for a superscalar architecture with selective value prediction, IET Computers & Digital Techniques, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 205-213, 2012.
  8. Ivanovic, M., Jain, L.C., E-Learning Paradigms and Applications, Agent-based Approach, Eds. Springer, 2014.
  9. Klüver, C., Klüver, J., Soft Computing Tools for the Analysis of Complex Problems, Proceedings of the First International Simulation Tools Conference & Expo, Brussels, Belgium, 2013.
  10. Nebro, A., Durillo, J.J., Coello, C.A., Luna, F., Alba, E., SMPSO: A new PSO-based metaheuristic for multi- objective optimization, IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence, pp. 66-73, USA, 2009.
  11. Pareto, V., Cours D'Economie Politique, vol. I and II, F. Rouge, Lausanne, 1896.
  12. Peñalvo, F.J., Palacios, R.C., Lytras, M., Outcomes of International Research Projects on Technology Applied to Education, Journal of Universal Computer Science, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1-4, Austria, 2012.
  13. Prensky, M., Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part II: Do They Really Think Differently?, On the Horizon, NCB University Press, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 1-6, 2001.
  14. Rajan, S.D., Chen, S-Y., An Interactive Tool for Teaching Multiobjective Design Optimization, Proceedings of 13 th Conference on Analysis and Computation, Structural Engineering World Congress, San Francisco, July, 1998.
  15. Schaffer, J.D., Multiple Objective Optimization with Vector Evaluated Genetic Algorithms, PhD thesis, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, 1984.
  16. Smullen, W., Taha, T., PSATSim: An Interactive Graphical Superscalar Architecture Simulator for Power and Performance Analysis, Proceedings of the Workshop on Computer Architecture Education, 2006.
  17. Zitzler, E., Deb, K., Thiele, L., Comparison of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: Empirical results. Evolutionary Computation, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 173-195, 2000.