https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Index en-au 5 https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:16957 Wed 11 Apr 2018 10:27:48 AEST ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:21480 Sat 24 Mar 2018 08:03:42 AEDT ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:27701 ∈MOEA) using two case studies based on the urban water resource systems serving two major Australian cities. The case study problems involved two or three objectives and 10 or 13 decision variables affecting infrastructure investment and system operation. The results show that NSGA-II was the worst performing method. However, none of the remaining methods was unambiguously superior. For example, while EMOACO-I converged more rapidly, its diversity was comparable but not superior to the other methods. Greater differences in performance were found as the number of objectives and case study complexity increased. This suggests that pooling the results from a number of methods could help guard against the vagaries in performance of individual methods.]]> Sat 24 Mar 2018 07:40:10 AEDT ]]>