66,053 research outputs found

    Evolutionary Algorithms for Reinforcement Learning

    Full text link
    There are two distinct approaches to solving reinforcement learning problems, namely, searching in value function space and searching in policy space. Temporal difference methods and evolutionary algorithms are well-known examples of these approaches. Kaelbling, Littman and Moore recently provided an informative survey of temporal difference methods. This article focuses on the application of evolutionary algorithms to the reinforcement learning problem, emphasizing alternative policy representations, credit assignment methods, and problem-specific genetic operators. Strengths and weaknesses of the evolutionary approach to reinforcement learning are presented, along with a survey of representative applications

    Learning Opposites with Evolving Rules

    Full text link
    The idea of opposition-based learning was introduced 10 years ago. Since then a noteworthy group of researchers has used some notions of oppositeness to improve existing optimization and learning algorithms. Among others, evolutionary algorithms, reinforcement agents, and neural networks have been reportedly extended into their opposition-based version to become faster and/or more accurate. However, most works still use a simple notion of opposites, namely linear (or type- I) opposition, that for each x∈[a,b]x\in[a,b] assigns its opposite as x˘I=a+b−x\breve{x}_I=a+b-x. This, of course, is a very naive estimate of the actual or true (non-linear) opposite x˘II\breve{x}_{II}, which has been called type-II opposite in literature. In absence of any knowledge about a function y=f(x)y=f(\mathbf{x}) that we need to approximate, there seems to be no alternative to the naivety of type-I opposition if one intents to utilize oppositional concepts. But the question is if we can receive some level of accuracy increase and time savings by using the naive opposite estimate x˘I\breve{x}_I according to all reports in literature, what would we be able to gain, in terms of even higher accuracies and more reduction in computational complexity, if we would generate and employ true opposites? This work introduces an approach to approximate type-II opposites using evolving fuzzy rules when we first perform opposition mining. We show with multiple examples that learning true opposites is possible when we mine the opposites from the training data to subsequently approximate x˘II=f(x,y)\breve{x}_{II}=f(\mathbf{x},y).Comment: Accepted for publication in The 2015 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE 2015), August 2-5, 2015, Istanbul, Turke

    Learning Opposites Using Neural Networks

    Full text link
    Many research works have successfully extended algorithms such as evolutionary algorithms, reinforcement agents and neural networks using "opposition-based learning" (OBL). Two types of the "opposites" have been defined in the literature, namely \textit{type-I} and \textit{type-II}. The former are linear in nature and applicable to the variable space, hence easy to calculate. On the other hand, type-II opposites capture the "oppositeness" in the output space. In fact, type-I opposites are considered a special case of type-II opposites where inputs and outputs have a linear relationship. However, in many real-world problems, inputs and outputs do in fact exhibit a nonlinear relationship. Therefore, type-II opposites are expected to be better in capturing the sense of "opposition" in terms of the input-output relation. In the absence of any knowledge about the problem at hand, there seems to be no intuitive way to calculate the type-II opposites. In this paper, we introduce an approach to learn type-II opposites from the given inputs and their outputs using the artificial neural networks (ANNs). We first perform \emph{opposition mining} on the sample data, and then use the mined data to learn the relationship between input xx and its opposite x˘\breve{x}. We have validated our algorithm using various benchmark functions to compare it against an evolving fuzzy inference approach that has been recently introduced. The results show the better performance of a neural approach to learn the opposites. This will create new possibilities for integrating oppositional schemes within existing algorithms promising a potential increase in convergence speed and/or accuracy.Comment: To appear in proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR 2016), Cancun, Mexico, December 201

    Big data analytics:Computational intelligence techniques and application areas

    Get PDF
    Big Data has significant impact in developing functional smart cities and supporting modern societies. In this paper, we investigate the importance of Big Data in modern life and economy, and discuss challenges arising from Big Data utilization. Different computational intelligence techniques have been considered as tools for Big Data analytics. We also explore the powerful combination of Big Data and Computational Intelligence (CI) and identify a number of areas, where novel applications in real world smart city problems can be developed by utilizing these powerful tools and techniques. We present a case study for intelligent transportation in the context of a smart city, and a novel data modelling methodology based on a biologically inspired universal generative modelling approach called Hierarchical Spatial-Temporal State Machine (HSTSM). We further discuss various implications of policy, protection, valuation and commercialization related to Big Data, its applications and deployment

    What is Computational Intelligence and where is it going?

    Get PDF
    What is Computational Intelligence (CI) and what are its relations with Artificial Intelligence (AI)? A brief survey of the scope of CI journals and books with ``computational intelligence'' in their title shows that at present it is an umbrella for three core technologies (neural, fuzzy and evolutionary), their applications, and selected fashionable pattern recognition methods. At present CI has no comprehensive foundations and is more a bag of tricks than a solid branch of science. The change of focus from methods to challenging problems is advocated, with CI defined as a part of computer and engineering sciences devoted to solution of non-algoritmizable problems. In this view AI is a part of CI focused on problems related to higher cognitive functions, while the rest of the CI community works on problems related to perception and control, or lower cognitive functions. Grand challenges on both sides of this spectrum are addressed
    • …
    corecore