Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 119 references

A single best algorithm cannot be named for redundancy allocation; the winner changes with the evaluation budget and the initialization method.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

A 65-algorithm benchmark on a bi-objective repairable redundancy-allocation problem shows that algorithm rankings are budget-dependent and that Scaled Binomial Initialization changes relative performance.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-03 challenge →

load-bearing objection A genuinely useful large-scale benchmark, but a possible load-bearing typo in the warm-standby CTMC pseudocode needs checking before the rankings can be trusted. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2512.18343 v2 pith:I324EOA4 submitted 2025-12-20 cs.NE

Large-scale benchmarking of multi-objective soft-computing metaheuristics for redundancy allocation in repairable k-out-of-n systems

Mateusz Oszczypa{\l}a , David Ibehej , Jakub Kudela This is my paper
classification cs.NE MSC 90B2590C2990C59
keywords redundancy allocation problemk-out-of-n systemsmulti-objective optimizationmetaheuristicscontinuous-time Markov chainstandby redundancyhypervolumebudget-aware benchmarking
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to show that choosing an optimizer for the redundancy allocation problem cannot be reduced to a single winner. Running 65 metaheuristics on six repairable k-out-of-n system benchmarks under two initialization regimes and multiple weight limits, it finds that the ranking of algorithms changes strongly with the number of function evaluations allowed. A structured initialization (SBI) gives a large early advantage and can flip the ordering of methods. It also finds that hot standby and a mixed active-warm standby strategy dominate the cost-availability Pareto fronts, while cold and warm standby essentially never appear. If true, this gives engineers a practical rule: pick the optimizer by budget regime and by whether structured initialization is available.

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that for the bi-objective redundancy allocation problem in repairable k-out-of-n systems, algorithm performance is a function of the computational budget. Using 65 metaheuristics, six system configurations, four weight limits, and up to 2e6 evaluations per run, it finds hypervolume rankings that shift across budget regimes. SBI initialization provides a substantial head start—in some cases the SBI initial population alone sits near the best-found front—and it changes the ranking of methods, sometimes drastically. The paper's concrete best performers are NNIA-SBI and CMOPSO-SBI for tight budgets, CMODEFTR-SBI and DSPCMDE-SBI for medium budgets, and NSGA

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is Scaled Binomial Initialization (SBI), a structured way to generate the initial binary population by varying the probability of a 1-bit with the index of the individual, plus continuous-time Markov chain (CTMC) availability models for each standby strategy. The CTMC models convert each subsystem's (n, k, strategy) choice into steady-state availability; hypervolume computed from the resulting bi-objective front feeds the budget-dependent rankings. SBI is what gives methods an early advantage and changes their relative performance, while the CTMC models provide the objective values on which all rankings rest.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the CTMC transition models for cold, warm, mixed, and hot standby—together with the system-level availability formulas used in the six case studies—produce correct availability values, because every algorithm ranking is computed from hypervolume of solutions evaluated with those values.

What would settle it

Run discrete-event simulation on a representative set of subsystem configurations covering all four standby strategies and various n and k values under the paper's failure, repair, and switch rates, then compare steady-state availability to the CTMC predictions; any systematic mismatch would undermine the objective values and therefore every ranking built on them.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Algorithm rankings for RAP should be reported with the evaluation budget explicitly conditioned; a single final-budget ranking can mislead practitioners.
  • SBI should be used in binary-encoded RAP settings because it consistently raises hypervolume and can put a method in a near-final convergence state from the start.
  • Hot standby is preferred under tight weight limits, while the mixed active-warm strategy dominates when more spares can be allocated, making cold and warm standby poor design choices under the tested parameters.
  • Larger systems require roughly an order of magnitude more evaluations to approach the best-found Pareto fronts, so budget planning should scale with system size.
  • The six case studies form a difficulty gradient that could serve as a reusable real-world benchmark suite for multi-objective optimizers.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: if the budget-dependence pattern holds beyond RAP, then any multi-objective benchmark that reports a single final-budget ranking is likely hiding which algorithms are actually useful for a practitioner's real, fixed evaluation budget.
  • Editorial inference: SBI's benefit is tied to binary encodings; the same idea—a parameterized, structured initial population—might transfer to other discrete or mixed-integer problems, but that transfer is not tested in this paper.
  • Editorial inference: the near-absence of cold and warm standby in Pareto fronts is contingent on the paper's parameter values; if cold-switch times were much faster or warm-standby failure rates much lower, those strategies could become competitive.
  • Editorial inference: because SBI changes rankings so drastically, cross-study comparisons of algorithms that use different initialization schemes may be implicitly unfair; a standardized initialization protocol may be needed before broad algorithmic conclusions can be drawn.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a large-scale benchmark of 65 multi-objective metaheuristics on a bi-objective redundancy allocation problem for repairable k-out-of-n systems. The problem minimizes system cost and maximizes steady-state availability, with subsystem decisions covering the number of redundant components and the choice among cold, warm, hot, or mixed standby strategies. Subsystem availability is computed via continuous-time Markov chains (CTMCs). A controlled experimental campaign uses six case studies of varied structure and dimension, four weight limits per case, two initialization regimes (random and the authors' SBI), and a budget of 2e6 function evaluations with 10 runs per configuration. Performance is compared via hypervolume, budget-dependent convergence profiles, and non-parametric statistics (Friedman ranks, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, Holm-Bonferroni correction). The central claims are that algorithm rankings are strongly budget-dependent, SBI provides a substantial early advantage and changes rankings, NSGA-II+ARSBX-SBI is robust for medium and large budgets, and hot/mixed redundancy strategies dominate Pareto-optimal solutions.

Significance. If the underlying CTMC and system-availability evaluations are correct, this is a valuable and unusually comprehensive benchmark: 65 algorithms, 24 problems, reproducible code and aggregate results on Zenodo, and a statistically disciplined comparison protocol. The budget-dependent ranking result and the SBI initialization effect have direct practical implications for algorithm selection in RAP studies. The paper also contributes a new real-world-inspired test suite for multi-objective optimization. However, the significance is conditional on the correctness of the objective-function implementation, which is precisely the point of concern raised in the major comments.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.2.5, Algorithm 1, lines 41–46] The pseudocode for a warm-standby failure sets the transition rate to ΛS(i,j) ← S(i,1)·λstandby. Since the state vector is defined as (active, standby, failed), S(i,1) is the active count and S(i,2) is the standby count. The text in §3.2.3 states that failure rates are sums over 'all active or standby units', so the standby failure rate should be S(i,2)·λstandby, not S(i,1)·λstandby. This is not a cosmetic issue: Table 4 shows warm and mixed strategies dominate Pareto fronts, so every hypervolume value and ranking in Figs. 12–17 depends on these rates. Please verify the MATLAB implementation, correct the pseudocode and code, and re-run the experiments if the code literally follows the current pseudocode.
  2. [Eqs. (8)–(13) and §3.2] The manuscript provides no independent validation of the CTMC-based availability values or the system-level availability formulas for CS2, CS3, CS5, and CS6. Given that the entire benchmark ranks algorithms by hypervolume computed from these objective values, the authors should verify their implementation against an independent solver (e.g., numerical solution of the global balance equations or Monte Carlo simulation) for at least several subsystem configurations and all system formulas. The internal inconsistency in Algorithm 1 (above) makes this verification especially important, as it indicates that the implementation may deviate from the intended model.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (1)] The last argument of f should be Am, not A1: it currently reads 'A1(nm, km, rm)', which is a typo.
  2. [After the References] The 'Acknowledgements' heading appears twice. One duplicate should be removed.
  3. [Table 4] The table is visually fragmented across CS blocks with different W values. Please unify the format or add clear subheadings so the reader can identify the columns for each case study and weight limit without scanning back and forth.
  4. [§4.3, Fig. 14] The relative-distance analysis uses the best-found HV over all methods/runs as a proxy for the true Pareto front. This is acknowledged, but the paper should also report variance or confidence intervals across the 10 runs, since the 'virtual best' curve is derived from the same data and may overstate the stability of the rankings.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular derivation: the SBI advantage is re-measured empirically; the only self-citation is non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The central claims are benchmark measurements. The objective values come from the stated CTMC model and system-level availability formulas (Eqs. 8-13), and the algorithm rankings come from hypervolume computed over those values across 65 external PlatEMO algorithms. No equation in the optimization loop is defined in terms of the outputs it is used to predict, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The SBI advantage (RQ3) is not assumed from the self-citation: the paper reports 31,200 experiments on six case studies with and without SBI, and the citation to Oszczypała (2025) supplies the initialization rule rather than the evidence for its benefit here. This is a self-citation, but it is not load-bearing because the claimed advantage is independently re-measured against many external algorithms and the code is released. The warm-standby transition-rate issue raised in the reader's skeptical analysis is a potential correctness concern in the objective model, not a case of a prediction being equal to its input by construction, and therefore does not affect the circularity score. No uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no known result is simply relabeled.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities or fundamental constants. Its load-bearing assumptions are the correctness of the CTMC implementations and system availability formulas, plus the choice of problem parameters and default algorithm settings.

free parameters (2)
  • Technical component parameters in Table 3 (failure rates, repair rates, switching rates, costs, weights, weight limits) = see Table 3
    These values are chosen by hand to be realistic; the strategy-preference conclusions (cold/warm are dominated by hot/mixed) could change under different parameter regimes, and the authors acknowledge the results are specific to 'the considered model and parameterization'.
  • SBI initialization schedule
    The SBI probability schedule is not specified in the text and is taken from prior self-cited work; the paper does not provide enough detail to reproduce this initialization from the manuscript alone.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Exponential distributions for failure, repair, and standby-to-active transition times (Section 3, assumption 6)
    The CTMC models require Markovian exponential rates; if real systems have non-exponential times, the availability evaluations would not apply.
  • domain assumption System availability is computed by the series/parallel/bridge formulas in Eqs. (8)-(13)
    These formulas assume independent subsystem availabilities and correct network reduction; any error in the complex expressions for CS5/CS6 would invalidate the objective values used for ranking.
  • standard math Each subsystem CTMC is ergodic and has a unique steady-state distribution
    The method solves the balance equations Pi*Lambda_S = 0 for steady-state availability; this requires positive recurrence of the Markov chains.
  • ad hoc to paper Default PlatEMO parameter settings are representative of each algorithm's intended performance
    The benchmark uses default algorithm settings with no per-algorithm tuning; the rankings might shift if each method were carefully tuned.

reviewed 2026-08-03 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Large-scale benchmarking of multi-objective soft-computing metaheuristics for redundancy allocation in repairable k-out-of-n systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/I324EOA4

@misc{pith2026251218343,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Large-scale benchmarking of multi-objective soft-computing metaheuristics for redundancy allocation in repairable k-out-of-n systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/I324EOA4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.18343}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

This paper presents a large-scale budget-aware benchmark of multi-objective soft-computing metaheuristics for a bi-objective redundancy allocation problem in repairable k-out-of-n systems. The problem combines cost minimization and steady-state availability maximization under weight constraints, with binary subsystem-level decisions determining both the number of redundant components and the redundancy strategy. Four strategies are considered: cold standby, warm standby, hot standby, and a mixed active-warm standby strategy. Subsystem availability is evaluated using continuous-time Markov chains, while the optimization task is treated as a constrained mixed-integer multi-objective problem. The study compares 65 metaheuristic algorithms from multiple algorithmic families under two initialization settings, with and without Scaled Binomial Initialization (SBI), across six case studies of increasing structural and dimensional complexity and four weight limits per case. Performance is assessed using hypervolume, budget-dependent convergence profiles, and non-parametric statistical comparisons. The results show that algorithm rankings are strongly budget-dependent, indicating that a single final-budget ranking can be misleading. SBI provides a substantial early advantage and can change the relative performance of competing methods, especially for larger instances. The best-performing algorithms vary across budget regimes: NNIA-SBI and CMOPSO-SBI are competitive under tight budgets, whereas NSGA-II+ARSBX-SBI performs robustly for medium and large budgets. From a system design perspective, Pareto-optimal solutions are dominated by hot standby and mixed redundancy strategies, while cold and warm standby rarely appear. The benchmark highlights the importance of initialization, computational budget, and problem complexity when selecting soft-computing optimizers for practical redundancy allocation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.18343 by David Ibehej, Jakub Kudela, Mateusz Oszczypa{\l}a.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Taxonomy of system configurations and characteristics. Notations 𝜆working Failure rate of active components in system working states 𝜆standby Failure rate of warm standby 𝜎cold Switch rate of component from cold standby to active state 𝜎warm Switch rate of component from warm standby to active state 𝜇 Repair rate of failed component 𝑚 Number of subsystems 𝒌 Minimum working component numbers set for subsyst… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Binary and real number encoding for standby components and redundancy strategies. For the selection of the metaheuristic algorithms, we utilized the PlatEMO platform (Tian et al., 2017), which is one of the largest and most-utilized open-source platforms for evolutionary computation methods, containing more than 300 implementations of a wide range of standard and state-of-the art algorithms. The implementa… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Classification of algorithms used in the study. 4. Results and discussion 4.1. Case studies The study involves the analysis of six case studies with increasing computational complexity. These range from three systems composed of five subsystems connected in series, series-parallel, and complex bridge configurations, to two larger-scale systems consisting of ten subsystems, and finally to a system comprisin… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: System structures of numerical case studies. System availability is calculated according to the following formulas: • CS1 – 5-unit series system 𝐴𝑺 = Π𝑖=1 5 𝐴𝑖 , (8) • CS2 – 5-unit series-parallel system 𝐴𝑺 = 1 − (1 − 𝐴1𝐴2 )(1 − (𝐴3 + 𝐴4 − 𝐴3𝐴4 )𝐴5 ), (9) • CS3 – complex bridge system 𝐴𝑺 = 𝐴1𝐴2 + 𝐴3𝐴4 + 𝐴1𝐴4𝐴5 + 𝐴2𝐴4𝐴5 − 𝐴1𝐴2𝐴3𝐴4 − 𝐴1𝐴2𝐴3𝐴5 − 𝐴1𝐴2𝐴4𝐴5 − 𝐴1𝐴3𝐴4𝐴5 − 𝐴2𝐴3𝐴4𝐴5 + 2𝐴1𝐴2𝐴3𝐴4𝐴5, (10) • CS4 – large… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Depiction of the Hypervolume indicator on a hypothetical example. First, we investigate the RQ1, i.e. finding out type of redundancy strategy is most commonly preferred by subsystems. To do this, we look at the final populations of all considered methods. Here, we look at the different proportions of the redundancy strategies in the different subsystems. Additionally, we look at only the Pareto-optimal sol… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Solutions from all populations, different CS with maximum value of W. Pareto-optimal points are highlighted and categorized by the proportion of the mixed strategy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Convergence of HV different methods on selected problems (average over the 10 runs). Selected methods are highlighted. To make proper algorithmic comparison and find the best-performing methods for different computational budgets, we performed an in￾depth statistical analysis of the results (Bäck et al., 2023). We followed the guidelines published in LaTorre et al. (2021) and Bartz-Beielstein et al. (2020… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [3]

    Presented at the GECCO ’25: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, ACM, NH Malaga Hotel Malaga Spain, pp

    On the Pareto Set and Front of Multiobjective Spherical Functions with Convex Constraints, in: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. Presented at the GECCO ’25: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, ACM, NH Malaga Hotel Malaga Spain, pp. 527–535. https://doi.org/10.1145/3712256.3726432 Bäck, T.H.W., Kononova, A.V ....

    arXiv

  2. [6]

    Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 142, 109898

    Estimating travel time in transport network with a combined multi-attributed graph convolutional neural network and multilayer perceptron model. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 142, 109898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2024.109898 Bili Chen, Wenhua Zeng, Yangbin Lin, Defu Zhang,

    arXiv 2024

  3. [10]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 253, 110581

    Efficient reliability analysis of generalized k -out-of- n phased -mission systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 253, 110581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2024.110581 Chen, H., Tian, Y ., Pedrycz, W., Wu, G., Wang, R., Wang, L.,

    arXiv 2024

  4. [11]

    IEEE Trans

    Hyperplane Assisted Evolutionary Algorithm for Many-Objective Optimization Problems. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 50, 3367–3380. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2019.2899225 Cheng, C., Yang, J., Li, L.,

    arXiv 2019

  5. [12]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 216, 108003

    Reliability evaluation of a k-out-of-n(G)-subsystem based multi-state phased mission system with common bus performance sharing subjected to common cause failures. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 216, 108003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.108003 Cheng, R., Jin, Y ., Olhofer, M., Sendhoff, B.,

    arXiv 2021

  6. [14]

    Computers & Industrial Engineering 203, 111045

    Reliability optimization of non-linear RRAP with cold standby through HPSOTLBO. Computers & Industrial Engineering 203, 111045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2025.111045 Chowdury, Md.A.M., Nath, R., Shukla, A.K., Rauniyar, A., Muhuri, P.K.,

    arXiv 2025

  7. [16]

    (Eds.), Reliability Analysis and Maintenance Optimization of Complex Systems, Springer Series in Reliability Engineering

    Reliability Analysis for Warm Standby Systems with Two Different Spare Areas, in: Zhao, Q.Q., Chung, I.H., Zheng, J., Kim, J. (Eds.), Reliability Analysis and Maintenance Optimization of Complex Systems, Springer Series in Reliability Engineering. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, pp. 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70288-4_4 De, S.,

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-70288-4_4

  8. [17]

    Innovations Syst Softw Eng 21, 1025–1039

    Optimization of time-dependent MORRAP for series–parallel system using improved NSGA-II in interval environment. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 21, 1025–1039. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-024-00588-9 De, S., Rakshit, P., Chowdhury, A.B.,

    work page doi:10.1007/s11334-024-00588-9

  9. [18]

    Applied Soft Computing 149, 110998

    Optimization of time based fuzzy multi -objective reliability redundancy allocation problem for x j − o u t − o f − m system using tuning and neighborhood based fuzzy MOPSO algorithm. Applied Soft Computing 149, 110998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110998 De, S., Roy, P ., Roy, S., Chowdhury, A.B.,

    arXiv 2023

  10. [19]

    Innovations Syst Softw Eng 21, 801–811

    Optimization of time-dependent fuzzy multi-objective reliability redundancy allocation problem for n-stage series– parallel system. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 21, 801–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-023-00539-w Deb, K., Jain, H.,

    work page doi:10.1007/s11334-023-00539-w

  11. [23]

    (Eds.), Parallel Problem Solving from Nature – PPSN XIII, Lecture Notes in Computer Science

    Clustering -Based Selection for Evolutionary Many -Objective Optimization, in: Bartz -Beielstein, T., Branke, J., Filipič, B., Smith, J. (Eds.), Parallel Problem Solving from Nature – PPSN XIII, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 538–547. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10762-2_53 Denysiuk, R., Costa, L., Esp...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10762-2_53

  12. [25]

    AAAI 37, 12399 –12407

    Runtime Analysis for the NSGA -II: Provable Speed -Ups from Crossover. AAAI 37, 12399 –12407. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v37i10.26461 Dong, J., Gong, W., Ming, F., Wang, L.,

    work page doi:10.1609/aaai.v37i10.26461

  13. [26]

    Expert Systems with Applications 195, 116499

    A two-stage evolutionary algorithm based on three indicators for constrained multi -objective optimization. Expert Systems with Applications 195, 116499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.116499 Faghih-Roohi, S., Xie, M., Ng, K.M., Yam, R.C.M.,

    arXiv 2022

  14. [27]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 123, 57–62

    Dynamic availability assessment and optimal component design of multi -state weighted k -out-of-n systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 123, 57–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2013.10.002 Ge, H., Zhao, M., Sun, L., Wang, Z., Tan, G., Zhang, Q., Chen, C.L.P.,

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ress.2013.10.002 2013

  15. [30]

    Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 94, 3301–3318

    Redundancy allocation problem in repairable systems with variegated components: a simulation-based optimization approach. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 94, 3301–3318. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949655.2024.2383722 Hamdan, K., Tavangar, M., Asadi, M.,

    arXiv 2024

  16. [31]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 205, 107267

    Optimal preventive maintenance for repairable weighted k-out-of-n systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 205, 107267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2020.107267 Hansen, N., Auger, A., Ros, R., Mersmann, O., Tušar, T., Brockhoff, D.,

    arXiv 2020

  17. [32]

    Optimization Methods and Software 36, 114–144

    COCO: a platform for comparing continuous optim izers in a black -box setting. Optimization Methods and Software 36, 114–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10556788.2020.1808977 He, C., Tian, Y ., Jin, Y ., Zhang, X., Pan, L.,

    arXiv 2020

  18. [34]

    Reliability Engineering & Syst em Safety 206, 107290

    Component mixing with a cold standby strategy for the redundancy allocation problem. Reliability Engineering & Syst em Safety 206, 107290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2020.107290 Hua, Y ., Jin, Y ., Hao, K.,

    arXiv 2020

  19. [35]

    IEEE Trans

    A Clustering-Based Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm for Multiobjective Optimization With Irregular Pareto Fronts. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 49, 2758–2770. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2018.2834466 Hua, Y ., Liu, Q., Hao, K.,

    arXiv 2018

  20. [36]

    Complex Intell

    Adaptive normal vector guided evolutionary multi - and many -objective optimization. Complex Intell. Syst. 10, 3709 –3726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-024-01353-y Huband, S., Hingston, P ., Barone, L., While, L.,

    work page doi:10.1007/s40747-024-01353-y

  21. [39]

    Presented at the GECCO ’25 Companion: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion, ACM, NH Malaga Hotel Malaga Spain, pp

    Benchmarking Seven Multi-objective Optimization Methods from the PlatEMO Platform on the bbob-biobj Test Suite, in: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion. Presented at the GECCO ’25 Companion: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion, ACM, NH Malaga Hotel Malaga Spain, pp. 1883–1890. https://doi.org/...

    arXiv

  22. [40]

    IEEE Trans

    An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Using Reference-Point Based Nondominated Sorting Approach, Part II: Handling Constraints and Extending to an Adaptive Approach. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 18, 602–622. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2013.2281534 Jiang, J., Wu, J., Luo, J., Yang, X., Huang, Z.,

    arXiv 2013

  23. [42]

    IEEE Trans

    A Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Reference Direction for Multiobjective and Many -Objective Optimization. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 21, 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2016.2592479 Jiao, R., Xue, B., Zhang, M.,

    arXiv 2016

  24. [43]

    IEEE Tran s

    A Multiform Optimization Framework for Constrained Multiobjective Optimization. IEEE Tran s. Cybern. 53, 5165 –5177. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2022.3178132 Jiao, R., Zeng, S., Li, C., Yang, S., Ong, Y .-S.,

    arXiv 2022

  25. [44]

    IEEE Trans

    Handling Constrained Many -Objective Optimization Problems via Problem Transformation. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 51, 4834–4847. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2020.3031642 Jixiang Cheng, Yen, G.G., Gexiang Zhang,

    arXiv 2020

  26. [45]

    IEEE Trans

    A Many -Objective Evolutionary Algorithm With Enhanced Mating and Environmental Selections. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 19, 592–605. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2015.2424921 Juybari, M.N., Guilani, P.P., Ardakan, M.A.,

    arXiv 2015

  27. [46]

    Ann Oper Res 312, 275–304

    Bi-objective sequence optimization in reliability problems with a matrix-analytic approach. Ann Oper Res 312, 275–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04039-7 Kayedpour, F., Amiri, M., Rafizadeh, M., Nia, A.S., Sharifi, M.,

    work page doi:10.1007/s10479-021-04039-7

  28. [47]

    Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability 238, 853–872

    A Markov chain-based genetic algorithm for solving a redundancy allocation problem for a system with repairable warm standby components. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability 238, 853–872. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748006X231164848 Khorshidi, H.A., Gunawan, I., Ibrahim, M.Y .,

    work page doi:10.1177/1748006x231164848

  29. [48]

    Journal of Manufacturing Systems 40, 54–62

    A value-driven approach for optimizing reliability-redundancy allocation problem in multi-state weighted k-out- of-n system. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 40, 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2016.06.002 Kim, J.Y ., Mastropasqua, L., Saeedmanesh, A., Brouwer, J.,

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jmsy.2016.06.002 2016

  30. [49]

    Energy 317, 134679

    Development of thermal control strategies for solid oxide electrolysis cell systems under dynamic operating conditions - Hot-standby and cold-start scenarios. Energy 317, 134679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2025.134679 Kohira, T., Kemmotsu, H., Akira, O., Tatsukawa, T.,

    arXiv 2025

  31. [51]

    https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV .2511.12264 Krömer, P., Uher, V ., Tušar, T., Filipič, B.,

    Benchmarking that Matters: Rethinking Benchmarking for Practical Impact. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV .2511.12264 Krömer, P., Uher, V ., Tušar, T., Filipič, B.,

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.12264

  32. [52]

    (Eds.), Applications of Evolutionary Computation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science

    On the Latent Structure of the bbob-biobj Test Suite, in: Smith, S., Correia, J., Cintrano, C. (Eds.), Applications of Evolutionary Computation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Nature Switzerl and, Cham, pp. 326–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031- 56855-8_20 Kudela, J.,

    doi:10.1007/978-3-031-

  33. [53]

    Nat Mach Intell 4, 123 8–1245

    A critical problem in benchmarking and analysis of evolutionary computation methods. Nat Mach Intell 4, 123 8–1245. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-022-00579-0 Kůdela, J., Zálešák, M., Charvát, P., Klimeš, L., Mauder, T.,

    work page doi:10.1038/s42256-022-00579-0

  34. [54]

    Expert Systems with Applications 238, 122373

    Assessment of the performance of metaheuristic methods us ed for the inverse identification of effective heat capacity of phase change materials. Expert Systems with Applications 238, 122373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.122373 Kukkonen, S., Lampinen, J.,

    arXiv 2023

  35. [55]

    Presented at the 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, IEEE, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, pp

    GDE3: The third Evolution Step of Generalized Differential Evolution, in: 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. Presented at the 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, IEEE, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, pp. 443–450. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2005.1554717 LaTorre, A., Molina, D., Osaba, E., Poyatos, J., Del Ser, J., Herrera, F.,

    arXiv 2005

  36. [56]

    Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 67, 100973

    A prescription of methodological guidelines for comparing bio-inspired optimization algorithms. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 67, 100973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2021.100973 Levitin, G., Xing, L., Dai, Y .,

    arXiv 2021

  37. [57]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 260, 110967

    Optimal operation and maintenance scheduling in generalized repairable m -out-of-n standby systems with common shocks. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 260, 110967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2025.110967 Levitin, G., Xing, L., Huang, H.Z.,

    arXiv 2025

  38. [58]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 189, 58–66

    Dynamic availability and performance deficiency of common bus systems with imperfec tly repairable components. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 189, 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2019.04.007 Li, H., Zhang, Q., Deng, J.,

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ress.2019.04.007 2019

  39. [59]

    IEEE Trans

    Biased Multiobjective Optimization and Decomposition Algorithm. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 47, 52 –66. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2015.2507366 Li, J., Wang, D., Yang, H., Liu, M., Si, S.,

    arXiv 2015

  40. [60]

    Advanced Engineering Informatics 65, 103163

    An exact algorithm for RAP with k-out-of-n subsystems and heterogeneous components under mixed and K-mixed redundancy strategies. Advanced Engineering Informatics 65, 103163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2025.103163 Li, J., Xin, B., Pardalos, P.M., Chen, J.,

    arXiv 2025

  41. [61]

    Ann Oper Res 296, 639–666

    Solving bi -objective uncertain stochastic resource allocation problems by the CVaR -based risk measure and decomposition-based multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. Ann Oper Res 296, 639–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03435-4 Li, M., Yang, S., Liu, X.,

    work page doi:10.1007/s10479-019-03435-4

  42. [62]

    IEEE Trans

    Pareto or Non -Pareto: Bi -Criterion Evolution in Multiobjective Optimization. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 20, 645 –665. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2015.2504730 Lin, Q., Li, J., Du, Z., Chen, J., Ming, Z.,

    arXiv 2015

  43. [63]

    European Journal of Operational Research 247, 732–744

    A novel multi-objective particle swarm optimization with multiple search strategies. European Journal of Operational Research 247, 732–744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.06.071 Lin, Q., Liu, S., Zhu, Q., Tang, C., Song, R., Chen, J., Coello, C.A.C., Wong, K. -C., Zhang, J.,

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.06.071 2015

  44. [64]

    IEEE Trans

    Particle Swarm Optimization With a Balanceable Fitness Estimation for Many-Objective Optimization Problems. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 22, 32–46. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2016.2631279 Liu, G., Pei, Z., Liu, N., Tian, Y .,

    arXiv 2016

  45. [65]

    Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 83, 101410

    Subspace segmentation based co -evolutionary algorithm for balancing convergence and diversity in many -objective optimization. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 83, 101410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2023.101410 Liu, Q., Jin, Y ., Heiderich, M., Rodemann, T., Yu, G.,

    arXiv 2023

  46. [66]

    IEEE Trans

    An Adaptive Reference Vector-Guided Evolutionary Algorithm Using Growing Neural Gas for Many- Objective Optimization of Irregular Problems. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 52, 2698–2711. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2020.3020630 Liu, Y ., Gong, D., Sun, J., Jin, Y .,

    arXiv 2020

  47. [67]

    IEEE Trans

    A Many-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm Using A One-by-One Selection Strategy. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 47, 2689–2702. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2016.2638902 Liu, Y ., Ishibuchi, H., Masuyama, N., Nojima, Y .,

    arXiv 2016

  48. [68]

    IEEE Trans

    Adapting Reference Vectors and Scalarizing Functions by Growing Neural Gas to Handle Irregular Pareto Fronts. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 1–1. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2019.2926151 Liu, Y ., Wang, G., Liu, P.,

    arXiv 2019

  49. [69]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 241, 109640

    A condition-based maintenance policy with non-periodic inspection for k-out-of-n: G systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 241, 109640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2023.109640 Liu, Z.-Z., Wang, B.-C., Tang, K.,

    arXiv 2023

  50. [70]

    IEEE Trans

    Handling Constrained Multiobjective Optimization Problems via Bidirectional Coevolution. IEEE Trans. Cybe rn. 52, 10163–10176. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2021.3056176 Liu, Z.-Z., Wang, Y .,

    arXiv 2021

  51. [71]

    IEEE Trans

    Handling Constrained Multiobjective Optimization Problems With Constraints in Both the Decision and Objective Spaces. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 23, 870–884. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2019.2894743 Ma, H., Wei, H., Tian, Y ., Cheng, R., Zhang, X.,

    arXiv 2019

  52. [72]

    Information Sciences 560, 68–91

    A multi-stage evolutionary algorithm for multi-objective optimization with complex constraints. Information Sciences 560, 68–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2021.01.029 Mahapatra, G.S., Maneckshaw, B., Barker, K.,

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ins.2021.01.029 2021

  53. [73]

    Expert Systems with Applications 198, 116696

    Multi-objective reliability redundancy allocation using MOPSO under hesitant fuzziness. Expert Systems with Applications 198, 116696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.116696 Matousek, R., Dobrovsky, L., Kudela, J.,

    arXiv 2022

  54. [74]

    10.5267/j.ijiec 13, 151–164

    How to start a heuristic? Utilizing lower bounds for solving the quadratic ass ignment problem. 10.5267/j.ijiec 13, 151–164. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijiec.2021.12.003 Mendes, C.S.R., Araújo, A.F.R., Farias, L.R.C.,

    doi:10.5267/j.ijiec 2021

  55. [75]

    Presented at the 2023 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE, Honolulu, Oahu, HI, USA, pp

    Non-Dominated Sorting Bidirectional Differential Coevolution, in: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC). Presented at the 2023 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE, Honolulu, Oahu, HI, USA, pp. 1709–1714. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC53992.2023.10394195 Ming, F., Gong, W., Wang, L.,

    arXiv 2023

  56. [76]

    IEEE Trans

    A Two-Stage Evolutionary Algorithm With Balanced Convergence and Diversity for Many-Objective Optimization. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern, Syst. 52, 6222–6234. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2022.3143657 Ming, F., Gong, W., Wang, L., Gao, L.,

    arXiv 2022

  57. [77]

    IEEE Trans

    A Constraint-Handling Technique for Decomposition-Based Constrained Many-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern, Syst. 53, 7783–7793. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2023.3299570 Ming, F., Gong, W., Wang, L., Jin, Y .,

    arXiv 2023

  58. [78]

    IEEE/CAA J

    Constrained Multi-Objective Optimization With Deep Reinforcement Learning Assisted Operator Selection. IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sinica 11, 919–931. https://doi.org/10.1109/JAS.2023.123687 Molina, J., Santana, L.V ., Hernández-Díaz, A.G., Coello Coello, C.A., Caballero, R.,

    arXiv 2023

  59. [80]

    J Intell Manuf 30, 1175–1194

    An improved particle swarm optimization model for solving homogen eous discounted series-parallel redundancy allocation problems. J Intell Manuf 30, 1175–1194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-017-1311-9 Oszczypała, M.,

    work page doi:10.1007/s10845-017-1311-9

  60. [81]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 263, 111279

    Bi-objective redundancy allocation problem in systems with mixed strategy: NSGA-II with a novel initialization. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 263, 111279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2025.111279 Oszczypała, M., Konwerski, J., Ziółkowski, J., Małachowski, J., 2024a. Reliability analysis and redundancy optimization of k-out-of-n systems with ra...

    arXiv 2025

  61. [82]

    Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 60, 100759

    Adaptive simulated binary crossover for rotated multi-objective optimization. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 60, 100759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2020.100759 Panichella, A.,

    arXiv 2020

  62. [83]

    Presented at the GECCO ’22: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, ACM, Boston Massachusetts, pp

    An improved Pareto front modeling algorithm for large -scale many-objective optimization, in: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. Presented at the GECCO ’22: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, ACM, Boston Massachusetts, pp. 565–573. https://doi.org/10.1145/3512290.3528732 Panichella, A.,

    arXiv

  63. [84]

    Presented at the GECCO ’19: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, ACM, Prague Czech Republic, pp

    An adaptive evolutionary algorithm based on non -euclidean geometry for many -objective optimization, in: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. Presented at the GECCO ’19: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, ACM, Prague Czech Republic, pp. 595–603. https://doi.org/10.1145/3321707.3321839 Peiravi, A., Nourelfath, ...

    arXiv 2021

  64. [85]

    Energy 310, 133229

    Membrane-based carbon capture for waste-to-energy: Process performance, impact, and time-efficient optimization. Energy 310, 133229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2024.133229 Qiao, K., Liang, J., Liu, Z., Y u, K., Yue, C., Qu, B., 2023a. Evolutionary Multitasking with Global and Local Auxiliary Tasks for Constrained Multi -Objective Optimization. IEEE/...

    arXiv 2024

  65. [86]

    IEEE Trans

    Evolutionary Constrained Multiobjective Optimization: Scalable High-Dimensional Constraint Benchmarks and Algorithm. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 28, 965–979. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2023.3281666 Qiao, K., Yu, K., Qu, B., Liang, J., Song, H., Y ue, C., Lin, H., Tan, K.C., 2023b. Dynamic Auxiliary Task -Based Evolutionary Multitasking for Constrained M...

    arXiv 2023

  66. [88]

    Presented at the GECCO05: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, ACM, Washington DC USA, pp

    An effective use of crowding distance in multiobjective particle swarm optimization, in: Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. Presented at the GECCO05: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, ACM, Washington DC USA, pp. 257–264. https://doi.org/10.1145/1068009.1068047 Reed, P.M., Hadka, D., Herman, J.D...

    arXiv

  67. [89]

    Advances in Water Resources 51, 438–456

    Evolutionary multiobjective optimization in water resources: The past, present, and future. Advances in Water Resources 51, 438–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.01.005 Singh, A., Singh, S.B.,

    doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.01.005 2012

  68. [90]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 262, 111221

    Dynamic reliability and sensitivity analysis of weighted (k, r) -out-of-n cold standby system with multi -performance multi-state components. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 262, 111221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2025.111221 Singh, V .P., Jain, M., Sharma, R.,

    arXiv 2025

  69. [91]

    Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 237, 42–69

    N-policy for redundant machining system with double retrial orbits using soft computing techniques. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 237, 42–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2025.04.025 Stripinis, L., Kůdela, J., Paulavičius, R., 2025a. Benchmarking Derivative-Free Global Optimization Algorithms Under Limited Dimensions and Large Evaluation Bud...

    arXiv 2025

  70. [92]

    IEEE Trans

    A Multistage Algorithm for Solving Multiobjective Optimization Problems With Multiconstraints. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 27, 1207–1219. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2022.3224600 Tian, Y ., Chen, J., Zhang, X.,

    arXiv 2022

  71. [93]

    Journal of Computer Applications (in Chinese) 44, 1386–1392

    Hybrid optimizer combining evolutionary computation and gradient descent for constrained multi-objective optimization. Journal of Computer Applications (in Chinese) 44, 1386–1392. https://doi.org/10.11772/j.issn.1001-9081.2023121798 Tian, Y ., Cheng, R., Zhang, X., Cheng, F., Jin, Y .,

    arXiv

  72. [94]

    IEEE Trans

    An Indicator-Based Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm With Reference Point Adaptation for Better Versatility. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 22, 609–622. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2017.2749619 Tian, Y ., Cheng, R., Zhang, X., Jin, Y .,

    arXiv 2017

  73. [95]

    IEEE Comput

    PlatEMO: A MA TLAB Platform for Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization [Educational Forum]. IEEE Comput. Intell. Mag. 12, 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCI.2017.2742868 Tian, Y ., Zhang, T., Xiao, J., Zhang, X., Jin, Y .,

    arXiv 2017

  74. [96]

    IEEE Trans

    A Coevolutionary Framework for Constrained Multiobjective Optimization Problems. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 25, 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2020.3004012 Tian, Y ., Zhang, Y ., Su, Y ., Zhang, X., Tan, K.C., Jin, Y .,

    arXiv 2020

  75. [97]

    IEEE Trans

    Balancing Objective Optimization and Constraint Satisfaction in Constrained Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 52, 9559–9572. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2020.3021138 Triantafyllou, I.S.,

    arXiv 2020

  76. [98]

    Elsevier, pp

    Consecutive-type coherent systems with cold standby redundancy at the system level: Advances and applications, in: Reliability Assessment and Optimization of Complex Systems. Elsevier, pp. 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-29112-8.00013-X Tusar, T.,

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-29112-8.00013-x

  77. [99]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 252, 110441

    A novel importance measure considering multi -constraints for RAP optimization of 1 -out-of-n subsystems with mixed redundancy strategy. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 252, 110441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2024.110441 Wang, R., Purshouse, R.C., Fleming, P .J.,

    arXiv 2024

  78. [100]

    IEEE Trans

    Preference-Inspired Coevolutionary Algorithms for Many-Objective Optimization. IEEE Trans. Evol. Computat. 17, 474–494. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2012.2204264 Wietheger, S., Doerr, B.,

    arXiv 2012

  79. [101]

    Presented at the GECCO ’24 Companion: Genetic a nd Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion, ACM, Melbourne VIC Australia, pp

    A Mathematical Runtime Analysis of the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm III (NSGA-III), in: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion. Presented at the GECCO ’24 Companion: Genetic a nd Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion, ACM, Melbourne VIC Australia, pp. 63–64. https://doi.org/10.1145/3638530.3664062 X...

    arXiv

  80. [102]

    Reliability Engineering & System Safety 233, 109120

    Reliability modeling of modular k-out-of-n systems with functional dependency: A case study of radar transmitter systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 233, 109120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2023.109120 Xu, Y ., Pi, D., Yang, S., Chen, Y ., Qin, S., Zio, E.,

    arXiv 2023

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 3, 2026.