MultiCrit should be MultiObjective

[jakob-r]

For me there was always some confusion about the terms.

@ja-thomas already renamed multipoint.multicrit to moiboi in #279

I want to propose to go one step further and rename everything MultiCrit to MultiObjective because in literature it is called Multi Objective Optimization and in smoof we have makeMultiObjectiveFunction so it becomes easily confusing when we additionally use the term of criteria in MBO for the infill criteria.

Please give your okay and I will rename it and open a PR for review.

[berndbischl]

I want to propose to go one step further and rename everything MultiCrit to MultiObjectiv

thats not true and i dont see an advantage here, while the renaming will break lots of code. both names are possible and we dont have to align names across multiple packages of different "teams"

i would suggest to close

[berndbischl]

PS: I meant its not true that all guys call it multiobjective, and nobody uses multicrit. (sorry, quoted not enough)

[jakob-r]

Advantages to call it Multi Objective

• uniformity with smoof
• Wikipedia calls it Multi-Objective Optimization
• better separation from infill criteria in our package
• 
• It's called ParEGO: an algorithm for multiobjective optimization of expensive functions

Drawbacks

• We will have to rename it - that will take max 4 hours
• ?

[ja-thomas]

+1 for having it consistent

I don't really care if we call it multi criteria or multi objective, but if we change it, we should do it now (e.g. before the package is on CRAN).

[berndbischl]

i have no problem, if it's about making it consistent and i really like effort to find good names also now is a better time to change names than later when we are on CRAN.

still, just saying in principle, this is a veeeeeeery well known book on the subject: http://www.math.hcmus.edu.vn/~nvthuy/om/Multicriteria%20Optimization.pdf

@jakobbossek @danielhorn please vote

[danielhorn]

I am on Bernds side. Both names are used. Here are some examples

• There is a book by Matthias Ehrgott called "Multicriteria optimization" (Buh, Bernd, you stole my argument)
• There is a field called MCDM - Multi Criteria Decision Making

And my perfect reason for using multi.crit as name in the code: It is shorter :) We could use multi.obj, but I think it is way easier to "say" crit than obj.

[jakobbossek]

+1 for consistency. In smoof I stick to multi-objective and this is also my preferred choice. Since we rely on smoof something like this is really inconsistent:

fn = makeMultiObjectiveFunction(...)
ctrl = makeMBOControl(...)
ctrl = someMBOControlSetter(multi.crit)

Thus +1 for multi.obj

[berndbischl]

argument for jakob: i just grepped the "R" folder for the term "objective" and use it a lot. ok, and if it "smoothes" naming with smoof, too, :) then maybe its good.

let @jakobbossek also vote

[berndbischl]

ok, seems like we want it. do it fast and consistent then close

[berndbischl]

democracy at work :)

[ja-thomas]

merged :)