
Transfer Optimization has gained a remarkable attention from the Swarm and Evolutionary Computation community in the recent years. It is undeniable that the concepts underlying Transfer Optimization are formulated on solid grounds. However, evidences observed in recent contributions confirm that there are critical aspects that are not properly addressed to date. This short communication aims to engage the readership around a reflection on these issues, and to provide rationale why they remain unsolved. Specifically, we emphasize on three critical points of Evolutionary Multitasking Optimization: i) the plausibility and practical applicability of this paradigm; ii) the novelty of some proposed multitasking methods; and iii) the methodologies used for evaluating newly proposed multitasking algorithms. As a result of this research, we conclude that some important efforts should be directed by the community in order to keep the future of this promising field on the right track. Our ultimate purpose is to unveil gaps in the current literature, so that prospective works can attempt to fix these gaps, avoiding to stumble on the same stones and eventually achieve valuable advances in the area.
17 pages, 3 figures. This papers has been accepted and published in Swarm and Evolutionary Computation under this DOI: 10.1016/j.swevo.2022.101203
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Evolutionary multitasking, Transfer Optimization, Computer Science - Neural and Evolutionary Computing, Neural and Evolutionary Computing (cs.NE), Multifactorial evolutionary algorithm, Multitasking optimization
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Evolutionary multitasking, Transfer Optimization, Computer Science - Neural and Evolutionary Computing, Neural and Evolutionary Computing (cs.NE), Multifactorial evolutionary algorithm, Multitasking optimization
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 21 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
