Obviously I was confused about the concept of Pareto front end and Pareto, and now I've figured out why my front end is so small.
Pareto the concept of winning I miss a very important point, that is, two individuals exist between three kinds of relationship, domination, is dominated, can not be judged. It is impossible to say that the two individuals are equal in status and cannot be compared with other individuals in the group. The mistake I made was two, not domination or domination, but obviously it was a mistake to understand the concept of winning.
BOOL Isnoninferiorbcell (const int i)
... {
BOOL flag = false;//non-inferior solution flag
for (int j=0;j<popsize;j++)
... {
if (i = = j) continue;//Here's a legacy.
if (Population[i] < population[j]) flag =true;
Else
... {
if (Population[i] > Population[j])
... {
return false;
}
}
Else
// {
Flag = false;//Error Recognizing the direct cause of a very small number of non-inferior solutions
Break
// }
}
return flag;
It is clearly only when the individual is at the mercy of other individuals that the judgment cycle should end, and my dichotomy of course inevitably leads to an individual who satisfies this harsh condition with little
