Abstract:
Multi-objective algorithms for scheduling offer many advantages over the more conventional single objective approach. By keeping user objectives separate instead of combined, more information is available to the end user to make trade-offs between competing objectives. Unlike single objective algorithms, which produce a single solution, multi-objective algorithms produce a set of solutions, called a Pareto surface, where no solution is strictly dominated by another solution for all objectives. From the end-user perspective a Pareto-surface provides a tool for reasoning about trade-offs between competing objectives. From the perspective of a software developer multi-objective algorithms provide an additional challenge. How can you tell if one multi-objective algorithm is better than another? This paper presents formal and visual tools for evaluating multi-objective algorithms and shows how the developer process of selecting an algorithm parallels the end-user process of selecting a solution for execution out of the Pareto-Surface.
