Performing multi-objective Bayesian optimisation by scalarising the objectives avoids the computation of expensive multi-dimensional integral-based acquisition functions, instead of allowing one-dimensional standard acquisition functions\textemdash such as Expected Improvement\textemdash to be applied. Here, two infill criteria based on hypervolume improvement\textemdash one recently introduced and one novel\textemdash are compared with the multi-surrogate Expected Hypervolume Improvement. The reasons for the disparities in these methods' effectiveness in maximising the hypervolume of the acquired Pareto Front are investigated. In addition, the effect of the surrogate model mean function on exploration and exploitation is examined: careful choice of data normalisation is shown to be preferable to the exploration parameter commonly used with the Expected Improvement acquisition function. Finally, the effectiveness of all the methodological improvements defined here is demonstrated on a real-world problem: the optimisation of a wind turbine blade aerofoil for both aerodynamic performance and structural stiffness. With effective scalarisation, Bayesian optimisation finds a large number of new aerofoil shapes that strongly dominate standard designs.

Scalarizing functions have been widely used to convert a multiobjective optimization problem into a single objective optimization problem. However, their use in solving (computationally) expensive multi- and many-objective optimization problems in Bayesian multiobjective optimization is scarce. Scalarizing functions can play a crucial role on the quality and number of evaluations required when doing the optimization. In this article, we study and review 15 different scalarizing functions in the framework of Bayesian multiobjective optimization and build Gaussian process models (as surrogates, metamodels or emulators) on them. We use expected improvement as infill criterion (or acquisition function) to update the models. In particular, we compare different scalarizing functions and analyze their performance on several benchmark problems with different number of objectives to be optimized. The review and experiments on different functions provide useful insights when using and selecting a scalarizing function when using a Bayesian multiobjective optimization method.