Effects of Objective Normalization on Regions of Interest in Preference-Based Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization

This paper studies preference-shaped expected improvement criteria for Bayesian multiobjective optimization. We consider two indicator families which are often used for similar algorithmic purposes, but which are geometrically different. The hypervolume indicator is based on a dystopian reference point and measures dominated volume in objective space. The R2 indicator is based on a utopian point and evaluates approximation sets through weighted Tchebycheff scalarization envelopes. The purpose of the paper is to make precise which preference transformations preserve exact computation, Pareto compatibility, and monotonicity properties, and which transformations change the underlying geometry. On the hypervolume side, we revisit canonical EHVI through the Deng representation, formulate product-density weighted EHVI in desirability coordinates, discuss cone-based EHVI as ordinary EHVI after a linear cone transformation, and separate these cases from truncated EHVI, where variance monotonicity may fail. On the R2 side, we prove that exact integral R2 improvement is not, in general, an ordinary objective-space weighted hypervolume. The obstruction is lower-dimensional: Lebesgue-density hypervolume cannot see certain boundary contributions that Tchebycheff scalarizations still detect. We then show that exact integral R2 improvement is exactly a scalarization-space volume, namely the measure of the Tchebycheff shadow between the incumbent scalarization envelope and the reference envelope. This representation yields finite-sum ER2I algorithms for discrete R2, quadrature methods for exact integral R2, and an achievement-space Gaussian surrogate formulation in which ER2I is an integral of scalar Gaussian expected improvements.

Scalar objective functions are required when a multi-criteria optimization problem must yield a single preferred design rather than only a Pareto set. The choice of scalarization influences which compromise is selected, how preference parameters are interpreted, and whether non-supported Pareto regions can be reached. This paper compares four formulations for normalized bi-criteria minimization: weighted sums, achievement scalarizing functions, desirability functions, and a fuzzy-logic-based formulation. Two analytically defined Pareto fronts, one convex and one concave, isolate the effect of the objective formulation from numerical optimizer behavior. The comparison focuses on reachable Pareto regions, parameter-induced selection density, compensation between criteria, sensitivity, and interpretability. Results show that weighted sums are simple but structurally limited on concave fronts, while achievement, desirability, and fuzzy formulations reach interior non-supported regions through different mechanisms. Desirability functions introduce nonlinear single-criterion preference mappings, whereas fuzzy rules express nonseparable and reference-dependent engineering preferences.

This paper investigates the role of dynamic population sizes in evolutionary multi-objective optimization. Although such approaches are widely used in practice, their benefits remain poorly understood, and rigorous runtime analyses explaining when and why they help are still scarce. To address this, we introduce the bi-objective problem class CLIMB and analyze the runtime of GSEMO and the widely used NSGA-II on this problem. Our results show that allowing a dynamic population size for NSGA-II can lead to a moderate improvement, yielding a speedup of order $Ω(\sqrt{n}/\log n)$. In particular, we prove that GSEMO and NSGA-II-DYN, a version of NSGA-II with dynamic population sizes we propose in this paper, can find the Pareto front of CLIMB in expected $O(n \log n)$ fitness evaluations, whereas NSGA-II with a fixed population size requires $Ω(n^{1.5})$ fitness evaluations in expectation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first rigorous runtime analysis in multi-objective optimization demonstrating a super-constant speedup of GSEMO over NSGA-II. Our analysis builds on concepts from single-objective optimization, like the evolution of population diversity over time, and employs the well-known family-three method to prove the lower bound.