Artificial intelligence in the cyber domain: Offense and defense

Artificial intelligence techniques have grown rapidly in recent years, and their applications in practice can be seen in many fields, ranging from facial recognition to image analysis. In the cybersecurity domain, AI-based techniques can provide better cyber defense tools and help adversaries improve methods of attack. However, malicious actors are aware of the new prospects too and will probably attempt to use them for nefarious purposes. This survey paper aims at providing an overview of how artificial intelligence can be used in the context of cybersecurity in both offense and defense.Web of Science123art. no. 41

Cooperative Wide Area Search Algorithm Analysis Using Sub-Region Techniques

Recent advances in small Unmmaned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) technology reinvigorates the need for additional research into Wide Area Search (WAS) algorithms for civilian and military applications. But due to the extremely large variability in UAV environments and design, Digital Engineering (DE) is utilized to reduce the time, cost, and energy required to advance this technology. DE also allows rapid design and evaluation of autonomous systems which utilize and support WAS algorithms. Modern WAS algorithms can be broadly classified into decision-based algorithms, statistical algorithms, and Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML) algorithms. This research continues on the work by Hatzinger and Gertsman by creating a decision-based algorithm which subdivides the search region into sub-regions known as cells, decides an optimal next cell to search, and distributes the results of the search to other cooperative search assets. Each cooperative search asset would store the following four crucial arrays in order to decide which cell to search: current estimated target density of each cell; the current number of assets in a cell; each cooperative asset’s next cell to search; and the total time any asset has been in a cell. A software-based simulation based environment, Advanced Framework for Simulation, Integration, and Modeling (AFSIM), was utilized to complete the verification process, create the test environment, and the System under Test (SUT). Additionally, the algorithm was tested against threats of various distributions to simulate clustering of targets. Finally, new Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs) are introduced from AI and ML including Precision, Recall, and F-score. The new and the original MOEs from Hatzinger and Gertsman are analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and covariance matrix. The results of this research show the algorithm does not have a significant effect against the original MOEs or the new MOEs which is likely due to a similar spreading of the Networked Collaborative Autonomous Munition (NCAM) as compared to Hatzinger and Gertsman. The results are negatively correlated to a decrease in target distributions standard deviation i.e. target clustering. This second result is more surprising as tighter target distributions could result in less area to search, but the NCAM continue to distribute their locations regardless of clusters identified

A Study of Data Security on E-Governance using Steganographic Optimization Algorithms

Steganography has been used massively in numerous fields to maintain the privacy and integrity of messages transferred via the internet. The need to secure the information has augmented with the increase in e-governance usage. The wide adoption of e-governance services also opens the doors to cybercriminals for fraudulent activities in cyberspace. To deal with these cybercrimes we need optimized and advanced steganographic techniques. Various advanced optimization techniques can be applied to steganography to obtain better results for the security of information. Various optimization techniques like particle swarm optimization and genetic algorithms with cryptography can be used to protect information for e-governance services. In this study, a comprehensive review of steganographic algorithms using optimization techniques is presented. A new perspective on using this technique to protect the information for e-governance is also presented. Deep Learning might be the area that can be used to automate the steganography process in combination with other method

An Empirical Study on Collective Intelligence Algorithms for Video Games Problem-Solving

Computational intelligence (CI), such as evolutionary computation or swarm intelligence methods, is a set of bio-inspired algorithms that have been widely used to solve problems in areas like planning, scheduling or constraint satisfaction problems. Constrained satisfaction problems (CSP) have taken an important attention from the research community due to their applicability to real problems. Any CSP problem is usually modelled as a constrained graph where the edges represent a set of restrictions that must be verified by the variables (represented as nodes in the graph) which will define the solution of the problem. This paper studies the performance of two particular CI algorithms, ant colony optimization (ACO) and genetic algorithms (GA), when dealing with graph-constrained models in video games problems. As an application domain, the "Lemmings" video game has been selected, where a set of lemmings must reach the exit point of each level. In order to do that, each level is represented as a graph where the edges store the allowed movements inside the world. The goal of the algorithms is to assign the best skills in each position on a particular level, to guide the lemmings to reach the exit. The paper describes how the ACO and GA algorithms have been modelled and applied to the selected video game. Finally, a complete experimental comparison between both algorithms, based on the number of solutions found and the levels solved, is analysed to study the behaviour of those algorithms in the proposed domain

Nature inspired computational intelligence for financial contagion modelling

This thesis was submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and awarded by Brunel University.Financial contagion refers to a scenario in which small shocks, which initially affect only a few financial institutions or a particular region of the economy, spread to the rest of the financial sector and other countries whose economies were previously healthy. This resembles the “transmission” of a medical disease. Financial contagion happens both at domestic level and international level. At domestic level, usually the failure of a domestic bank or financial intermediary triggers transmission by defaulting on inter-bank liabilities, selling assets in a fire sale, and undermining confidence in similar banks. An example of this phenomenon is the failure of Lehman Brothers and the subsequent turmoil in the US financial markets. International financial contagion happens in both advanced economies and developing economies, and is the transmission of financial crises across financial markets. Within the current globalise financial system, with large volumes of cash flow and cross-regional operations of large banks and hedge funds, financial contagion usually happens simultaneously among both domestic institutions and across countries. There is no conclusive definition of financial contagion, most research papers study contagion by analyzing the change in the variance-covariance matrix during the period of market turmoil. King and Wadhwani (1990) first test the correlations between the US, UK and Japan, during the US stock market crash of 1987. Boyer (1997) finds significant increases in correlation during financial crises, and reinforces a definition of financial contagion as a correlation changing during the crash period. Forbes and Rigobon (2002) give a definition of financial contagion. In their work, the term interdependence is used as the alternative to contagion. They claim that for the period they study, there is no contagion but only interdependence. Interdependence leads to common price movements during periods both of stability and turmoil. In the past two decades, many studies (e.g. Kaminsky et at., 1998; Kaminsky 1999) have developed early warning systems focused on the origins of financial crises rather than on financial contagion. Further authors (e.g. Forbes and Rigobon, 2002; Caporale et al, 2005), on the other hand, have focused on studying contagion or interdependence. In this thesis, an overall mechanism is proposed that simulates characteristics of propagating crisis through contagion. Within that scope, a new co-evolutionary market model is developed, where some of the technical traders change their behaviour during crisis to transform into herd traders making their decisions based on market sentiment rather than underlying strategies or factors. The thesis focuses on the transformation of market interdependence into contagion and on the contagion effects. The author first build a multi-national platform to allow different type of players to trade implementing their own rules and considering information from the domestic and a foreign market. Traders’ strategies and the performance of the simulated domestic market are trained using historical prices on both markets, and optimizing artificial market’s parameters through immune - particle swarm optimization techniques (I-PSO). The author also introduces a mechanism contributing to the transformation of technical into herd traders. A generalized auto-regressive conditional heteroscedasticity - copula (GARCH-copula) is further applied to calculate the tail dependence between the affected market and the origin of the crisis, and that parameter is used in the fitness function for selecting the best solutions within the evolving population of possible model parameters, and therefore in the optimization criteria for contagion simulation. The overall model is also applied in predictive mode, where the author optimize in the pre-crisis period using data from the domestic market and the crisis-origin foreign market, and predict in the crisis period using data from the foreign market and predicting the affected domestic market

A new approach to particle swarm optimization algorithm

Particularly interesting group consists of algorithms that implement co-evolution or co-operation in natural environments, giving much more powerful implementations. The main aim is to obtain the algorithm which operation is not influenced by the environment. An unusual look at optimization algorithms made it possible to develop a new algorithm and its metaphors define for two groups of algorithms. These studies concern the particle swarm optimization algorithm as a model of predator and prey. New properties of the algorithm resulting from the co-operation mechanism that determines the operation of algorithm and significantly reduces environmental influence have been shown. Definitions of functions of behavior scenarios give new feature of the algorithm. This feature allows self controlling the optimization process. This approach can be successfully used in computer games. Properties of the new algorithm make it worth of interest, practical application and further research on its development. This study can be also an inspiration to search other solutions that implementing co-operation or co-evolution.Angeline, P. (1998). Using selection to improve particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, Anchorage (pp. 84–89).Arquilla, J., & Ronfeldt, D. (2000). Swarming and the future of conflict, RAND National Defense Research Institute, Santa Monica, CA, US.Bessaou, M., & Siarry, P. (2001). A genetic algorithm with real-value coding to optimize multimodal continuous functions. Structural and Multidiscipline Optimization, 23, 63–74.Bird, S., & Li, X. (2006). Adaptively choosing niching parameters in a PSO. In Proceedings of the 2006 genetic and evolutionary computation conference (pp. 3–10).Bird, S., & Li, X. (2007). Using regression to improve local convergence. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 592–599).Blackwell, T., & Bentley, P. (2002). Dont push me! Collision-avoiding swarms. In Proceedings of the IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, Honolulu (pp. 1691–1696).Brits, R., Engelbrecht, F., & van den Bergh, A. P. (2002). Solving systems of unconstrained equations using particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE conference on systems, man, and cybernetics (pp. 102–107).Brits, R., Engelbrecht, A., & van den Bergh, F. (2002). A niching particle swarm optimizer. In Proceedings of the fourth asia-pacific conference on simulated evolution and learning (pp. 692–696).Chelouah, R., & Siarry, P. (2000). A continuous genetic algorithm designed for the global optimization of multimodal functions. Journal of Heuristics, 6(2), 191–213.Chelouah, R., & Siarry, P. (2000). Tabu search applied to global optimization. European Journal of Operational Research, 123, 256–270.Chelouah, R., & Siarry, P. (2003). Genetic and Nelder–Mead algorithms hybridized for a more accurate global optimization of continuous multiminima function. European Journal of Operational Research, 148(2), 335–348.Chelouah, R., & Siarry, P. (2005). A hybrid method combining continuous taboo search and Nelder–Mead simplex algorithms for the global optimization of multiminima functions. European Journal of Operational Research, 161, 636–654.Chen, T., & Chi, T. (2010). On the improvements of the particle swarm optimization algorithm. Advances in Engineering Software, 41(2), 229–239.Clerc, M., & Kennedy, J. (2002). The particle swarm-explosion, stability, and convergence in a multidimensional complex space. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(1), 58–73.Fan, H., & Shi, Y. (2001). Study on Vmax of particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the workshop particle swarm optimization, Indianapolis.Gao, H., & Xu, W. (2011). Particle swarm algorithm with hybrid mutation strategy. Applied Soft Computing, 11(8), 5129–5142.Gosciniak, I. (2008). Immune algorithm in non-stationary optimization task. In Proceedings of the 2008 international conference on computational intelligence for modelling control & automation, CIMCA ’08 (pp. 750–755). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society.He, Q., & Wang, L. (2007). An effective co-evolutionary particle swarm optimization for constrained engineering design problems. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 20(1), 89–99.Higashitani, M., Ishigame, A., & Yasuda, K., (2006). Particle swarm optimization considering the concept of predator–prey behavior. In 2006 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 434–437).Higashitani, M., Ishigame, A., & Yasuda, K. (2008). Pursuit-escape particle swarm optimization. IEEJ Transactions on Electrical and Electronic Engineering, 3(1), 136–142.Hu, X., & Eberhart, R. (2002). Multiobjective optimization using dynamic neighborhood particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the evolutionary computation on 2002. CEC ’02. Proceedings of the 2002 congress (Vol. 02, pp. 1677–1681). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society.Hu, X., Eberhart, R., & Shi, Y. (2003). Engineering optimization with particle swarm. In IEEE swarm intelligence symposium, SIS 2003 (pp. 53–57). Indianapolis: IEEE Neural Networks Society.Jang, W., Kang, H., Lee, B., Kim, K., Shin, D., & Kim, S. (2007). Optimized fuzzy clustering by predator prey particle swarm optimization. In IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, CEC2007 (pp. 3232–3238).Kennedy, J. (2000). Stereotyping: Improving particle swarm performance with cluster analysis. In Proceedings of the 2000 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 1507–1512).Kennedy, J., & Mendes, R. (2002). Population structure and particle swarm performance. In IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 1671–1676).Kuo, H., Chang, J., & Shyu, K. (2004). A hybrid algorithm of evolution and simplex methods applied to global optimization. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 12(4), 280–289.Leontitsis, A., Kontogiorgos, D., & Pange, J. (2006). Repel the swarm to the optimum. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 173(1), 265–272.Li, X. (2004). Adaptively choosing neighborhood bests using species in a particle swarm optimizer for multimodal function optimization. In Proceedings of the 2004 genetic and evolutionary computation conference (pp. 105–116).Li, C., & Yang, S. (2009). A clustering particle swarm optimizer for dynamic optimization. In Proceedings of the 2009 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 439–446).Liang, J., Suganthan, P., & Deb, K. (2005). Novel composition test functions for numerical global optimization. In Proceedings of the swarm intelligence symposium [Online]. Available: .Liang, J., Qin, A., Suganthan, P., & Baskar, S. (2006). Comprehensive learning particle swarm optimizer for global optimization of multimodal functions. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 10(3), 281–295.Lovbjerg, M., & Krink, T. (2002). Extending particle swarm optimizers with self-organized criticality. In Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary computation, Honolulu (pp. 1588–1593).Lung, R., & Dumitrescu, D. (2007). A collaborative model for tracking optima in dynamic environments. In Proceedings of the 2007 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 564–567).Mendes, R., Kennedy, J., & Neves, J. (2004). The fully informed particle swarm: simpler, maybe better. IEEE Transaction on Evolutionary Computation, 8(3), 204–210.Miranda, V., & Fonseca, N. (2002). New evolutionary particle swarm algorithm (EPSO) applied to voltage/VAR control. In Proceedings of the 14th power systems computation conference, Seville, Spain [Online] Available: .Parrott, D., & Li, X. (2004). A particle swarm model for tracking multiple peaks in a dynamic environment using speciation. In Proceedings of the 2004 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 98–103).Parrott, D., & Li, X. (2006). Locating and tracking multiple dynamic optima by a particle swarm model using speciation. In IEEE transaction on evolutionary computation (Vol. 10, pp. 440–458).Parsopoulos, K., & Vrahatis, M. (2004). UPSOA unified particle swarm optimization scheme. Lecture Series on Computational Sciences, 868–873.Passaroand, A., & Starita, A. (2008). Particle swarm optimization for multimodal functions: A clustering approach. Journal of Artificial Evolution and Applications, 2008, 15 (Article ID 482032).Peram, T., Veeramachaneni, K., & Mohan, C. (2003). Fitness-distance-ratio based particle swarm optimization. In Swarm intelligence symp. (pp. 174–181).Sedighizadeh, D., & Masehian, E. (2009). Particle swarm optimization methods, taxonomy and applications. International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering, 1(5), 1793–8201.Shi, Y., & Eberhart, R. (2001). Particle swarm optimization with fuzzy adaptive inertia weight. In Proceedings of the workshop particle swarm optimization, Indianapolis (pp. 101–106).Shi, Y., & Eberhart, R. (1998). A modified particle swarm optimizer. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation (pp. 69–73). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society.Thomsen, R. (2004). Multimodal optimization using crowding-based differential evolution. In Proceedings of the 2004 congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 1382–1389).Trojanowski, K., & Wierzchoń, S. (2009). Immune-based algorithms for dynamic optimization. Information Sciences, 179(10), 1495–1515.Tsoulos, I., & Stavrakoudis, A. (2010). Enhancing PSO methods for global optimization. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 216(10), 2988–3001.van den Bergh, F., & Engelbrecht, A. (2004). A cooperative approach to particle swarm optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 8, 225–239.Wolpert, D., & Macready, W. (1997). No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Transaction on Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 67–82.Xie, X., Zhang, W., & Yang, Z. (2002). Dissipative particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary computation (pp. 1456–1461).Yang, S., & Li, C. (2010). A clustering particle swarm optimizer for locating and tracking multiple optima in dynamic environments. In IEEE Trans. on evolutionary computation (Vol. 14, pp. 959–974).Kuo, H., Chang, J., & Liu, C. (2006). Particle swarm optimization for global optimization problems. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 14(3), 170–181

Evolutionary Computation 2020

Intelligent optimization is based on the mechanism of computational intelligence to refine a suitable feature model, design an effective optimization algorithm, and then to obtain an optimal or satisfactory solution to a complex problem. Intelligent algorithms are key tools to ensure global optimization quality, fast optimization efficiency and robust optimization performance. Intelligent optimization algorithms have been studied by many researchers, leading to improvements in the performance of algorithms such as the evolutionary algorithm, whale optimization algorithm, differential evolution algorithm, and particle swarm optimization. Studies in this arena have also resulted in breakthroughs in solving complex problems including the green shop scheduling problem, the severe nonlinear problem in one-dimensional geodesic electromagnetic inversion, error and bug finding problem in software, the 0-1 backpack problem, traveler problem, and logistics distribution center siting problem. The editors are confident that this book can open a new avenue for further improvement and discoveries in the area of intelligent algorithms. The book is a valuable resource for researchers interested in understanding the principles and design of intelligent algorithms

A Comprehensive Survey on Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm and Its Applications

Particle swarm optimization (PSO) is a heuristic global optimization method, proposed originally by Kennedy and Eberhart in 1995. It is now one of the most commonly used optimization techniques. This survey presented a comprehensive investigation of PSO. On one hand, we provided advances with PSO, including its modifications (including quantum-behaved PSO, bare-bones PSO, chaotic PSO, and fuzzy PSO), population topology (as fully connected, von Neumann, ring, star, random, etc.), hybridization (with genetic algorithm, simulated annealing, Tabu search, artificial immune system, ant colony algorithm, artificial bee colony, differential evolution, harmonic search, and biogeography-based optimization), extensions (to multiobjective, constrained, discrete, and binary optimization), theoretical analysis (parameter selection and tuning, and convergence analysis), and parallel implementation (in multicore, multiprocessor, GPU, and cloud computing forms). On the other hand, we offered a survey on applications of PSO to the following eight fields: electrical and electronic engineering, automation control systems, communication theory, operations research, mechanical engineering, fuel and energy, medicine, chemistry, and biology. It is hoped that this survey would be beneficial for the researchers studying PSO algorithms