101,513 research outputs found
Improving the Interpretability of Classification Rules Discovered by an Ant Colony Algorithm: Extended Results
The vast majority of Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) algorithms for inducing classification rules use an ACO-based procedure to create a rule in an one-at-a-time fashion. An improved search strategy has been proposed in the cAnt-MinerPB algorithm, where an ACO-based procedure is used to create a complete list of rules (ordered rules)-i.e., the ACO search is guided by the quality of a list of rules, instead of an individual rule. In this paper we propose an extension of the cAnt-MinerPB algorithm to discover a set of rules (unordered rules). The main motivations for this work are to improve the interpretation of individual rules by discovering a set of rules and to evaluate the impact on the predictive accuracy of the algorithm. We also propose a new measure to evaluate the interpretability of the discovered rules to mitigate the fact that the commonly-used model size measure ignores how the rules are used to make a class prediction. Comparisons with state-of-the-art rule induction algorithms, support vector machines and the cAnt-MinerPB producing ordered rules are also presented
Tracking moving optima using Kalman-based predictions
The dynamic optimization problem concerns finding an optimum in a changing environment. In the field of evolutionary algorithms, this implies dealing with a timechanging fitness landscape. In this paper we compare different techniques for integrating motion information into an evolutionary algorithm, in the case it has to follow a time-changing optimum, under the assumption that the changes follow a nonrandom law. Such a law can be estimated in order to improve the optimum tracking capabilities of the algorithm. In particular, we will focus on first order dynamical laws to track moving objects. A vision-based tracking robotic application is used as testbed for experimental comparison
Genetic algorithms with memory- and elitism-based immigrants in dynamic environments
Copyright @ 2008 by the Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyIn recent years the genetic algorithm community has shown a growing interest in studying dynamic optimization problems. Several approaches have been devised. The random immigrants and memory schemes are two major ones. The random immigrants scheme addresses dynamic environments by maintaining the population diversity while the memory scheme aims to adapt genetic algorithms quickly to new environments by reusing historical information. This paper investigates a hybrid memory and random immigrants scheme, called memory-based immigrants, and a hybrid elitism and random immigrants scheme, called elitism-based immigrants, for genetic algorithms in dynamic environments. In these schemes, the best individual from memory or the elite from the previous generation is retrieved as the base to create immigrants into the population by mutation. This way, not only can diversity be maintained but it is done more efficiently to adapt genetic algorithms to the current environment. Based on a series of systematically constructed dynamic problems, experiments are carried out to compare genetic algorithms with the memory-based and elitism-based immigrants schemes against genetic algorithms with traditional memory and random immigrants schemes and a hybrid memory and multi-population scheme. The sensitivity analysis regarding some key parameters is also carried out. Experimental results show that the memory-based and elitism-based immigrants schemes efficiently improve the performance of genetic algorithms in dynamic environments.This work was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) of the United Kingdom under Grant EP/E060722/01
A Field Guide to Genetic Programming
xiv, 233 p. : il. ; 23 cm.Libro ElectrónicoA Field Guide to Genetic Programming (ISBN 978-1-4092-0073-4) is an introduction to genetic programming (GP). GP is a systematic, domain-independent method for getting computers to solve problems automatically starting from a high-level statement of what needs to be done. Using ideas from natural evolution, GP starts from an ooze of random computer programs, and progressively refines them through processes of mutation and sexual recombination, until solutions emerge. All this without the user having to know or specify the form or structure of solutions in advance. GP has generated a plethora of human-competitive results and applications, including novel scientific discoveries and patentable inventions. The authorsIntroduction --
Representation, initialisation and operators in Tree-based GP --
Getting ready to run genetic programming --
Example genetic programming run --
Alternative initialisations and operators in Tree-based GP --
Modular, grammatical and developmental Tree-based GP --
Linear and graph genetic programming --
Probalistic genetic programming --
Multi-objective genetic programming --
Fast and distributed genetic programming --
GP theory and its applications --
Applications --
Troubleshooting GP --
Conclusions.Contents
xi
1 Introduction
1.1 Genetic Programming in a Nutshell
1.2 Getting Started
1.3 Prerequisites
1.4 Overview of this Field Guide I
Basics
2 Representation, Initialisation and GP
2.1 Representation
2.2 Initialising the Population
2.3 Selection
2.4 Recombination and Mutation Operators in Tree-based
3 Getting Ready to Run Genetic Programming 19
3.1 Step 1: Terminal Set 19
3.2 Step 2: Function Set 20
3.2.1 Closure 21
3.2.2 Sufficiency 23
3.2.3 Evolving Structures other than Programs 23
3.3 Step 3: Fitness Function 24
3.4 Step 4: GP Parameters 26
3.5 Step 5: Termination and solution designation 27
4 Example Genetic Programming Run
4.1 Preparatory Steps 29
4.2 Step-by-Step Sample Run 31
4.2.1 Initialisation 31
4.2.2 Fitness Evaluation Selection, Crossover and Mutation Termination and Solution Designation Advanced Genetic Programming
5 Alternative Initialisations and Operators in
5.1 Constructing the Initial Population
5.1.1 Uniform Initialisation
5.1.2 Initialisation may Affect Bloat
5.1.3 Seeding
5.2 GP Mutation
5.2.1 Is Mutation Necessary?
5.2.2 Mutation Cookbook
5.3 GP Crossover
5.4 Other Techniques 32
5.5 Tree-based GP 39
6 Modular, Grammatical and Developmental Tree-based GP 47
6.1 Evolving Modular and Hierarchical Structures 47
6.1.1 Automatically Defined Functions 48
6.1.2 Program Architecture and Architecture-Altering 50
6.2 Constraining Structures 51
6.2.1 Enforcing Particular Structures 52
6.2.2 Strongly Typed GP 52
6.2.3 Grammar-based Constraints 53
6.2.4 Constraints and Bias 55
6.3 Developmental Genetic Programming 57
6.4 Strongly Typed Autoconstructive GP with PushGP 59
7 Linear and Graph Genetic Programming 61
7.1 Linear Genetic Programming 61
7.1.1 Motivations 61
7.1.2 Linear GP Representations 62
7.1.3 Linear GP Operators 64
7.2 Graph-Based Genetic Programming 65
7.2.1 Parallel Distributed GP (PDGP) 65
7.2.2 PADO 67
7.2.3 Cartesian GP 67
7.2.4 Evolving Parallel Programs using Indirect Encodings 68
8 Probabilistic Genetic Programming
8.1 Estimation of Distribution Algorithms 69
8.2 Pure EDA GP 71
8.3 Mixing Grammars and Probabilities 74
9 Multi-objective Genetic Programming 75
9.1 Combining Multiple Objectives into a Scalar Fitness Function 75
9.2 Keeping the Objectives Separate 76
9.2.1 Multi-objective Bloat and Complexity Control 77
9.2.2 Other Objectives 78
9.2.3 Non-Pareto Criteria 80
9.3 Multiple Objectives via Dynamic and Staged Fitness Functions 80
9.4 Multi-objective Optimisation via Operator Bias 81
10 Fast and Distributed Genetic Programming 83
10.1 Reducing Fitness Evaluations/Increasing their Effectiveness 83
10.2 Reducing Cost of Fitness with Caches 86
10.3 Parallel and Distributed GP are Not Equivalent 88
10.4 Running GP on Parallel Hardware 89
10.4.1 Master–slave GP 89
10.4.2 GP Running on GPUs 90
10.4.3 GP on FPGAs 92
10.4.4 Sub-machine-code GP 93
10.5 Geographically Distributed GP 93
11 GP Theory and its Applications 97
11.1 Mathematical Models 98
11.2 Search Spaces 99
11.3 Bloat 101
11.3.1 Bloat in Theory 101
11.3.2 Bloat Control in Practice 104
III
Practical Genetic Programming
12 Applications
12.1 Where GP has Done Well
12.2 Curve Fitting, Data Modelling and Symbolic Regression
12.3 Human Competitive Results – the Humies
12.4 Image and Signal Processing
12.5 Financial Trading, Time Series, and Economic Modelling
12.6 Industrial Process Control
12.7 Medicine, Biology and Bioinformatics
12.8 GP to Create Searchers and Solvers – Hyper-heuristics xiii
12.9 Entertainment and Computer Games 127
12.10The Arts 127
12.11Compression 128
13 Troubleshooting GP
13.1 Is there a Bug in the Code?
13.2 Can you Trust your Results?
13.3 There are No Silver Bullets
13.4 Small Changes can have Big Effects
13.5 Big Changes can have No Effect
13.6 Study your Populations
13.7 Encourage Diversity
13.8 Embrace Approximation
13.9 Control Bloat
13.10 Checkpoint Results
13.11 Report Well
13.12 Convince your Customers
14 Conclusions
Tricks of the Trade
A Resources
A.1 Key Books
A.2 Key Journals
A.3 Key International Meetings
A.4 GP Implementations
A.5 On-Line Resources 145
B TinyGP 151
B.1 Overview of TinyGP 151
B.2 Input Data Files for TinyGP 153
B.3 Source Code 154
B.4 Compiling and Running TinyGP 162
Bibliography 167
Inde
Evolving a Behavioral Repertoire for a Walking Robot
Numerous algorithms have been proposed to allow legged robots to learn to
walk. However, the vast majority of these algorithms is devised to learn to
walk in a straight line, which is not sufficient to accomplish any real-world
mission. Here we introduce the Transferability-based Behavioral Repertoire
Evolution algorithm (TBR-Evolution), a novel evolutionary algorithm that
simultaneously discovers several hundreds of simple walking controllers, one
for each possible direction. By taking advantage of solutions that are usually
discarded by evolutionary processes, TBR-Evolution is substantially faster than
independently evolving each controller. Our technique relies on two methods:
(1) novelty search with local competition, which searches for both
high-performing and diverse solutions, and (2) the transferability approach,
which com-bines simulations and real tests to evolve controllers for a physical
robot. We evaluate this new technique on a hexapod robot. Results show that
with only a few dozen short experiments performed on the robot, the algorithm
learns a repertoire of con-trollers that allows the robot to reach every point
in its reachable space. Overall, TBR-Evolution opens a new kind of learning
algorithm that simultaneously optimizes all the achievable behaviors of a
robot.Comment: 33 pages; Evolutionary Computation Journal 201
ETEA: A euclidean minimum spanning tree-Based evolutionary algorithm for multiobjective optimization
© the Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyAbstract The Euclidean minimum spanning tree (EMST), widely used in a variety of domains, is a minimum spanning tree of a set of points in the space, where the edge weight between each pair of points is their Euclidean distance. Since the generation of an EMST is entirely determined by the Euclidean distance between solutions (points), the properties of EMSTs have a close relation with the distribution and position information of solutions. This paper explores the properties of EMSTs and proposes an EMST-based Evolutionary Algorithm (ETEA) to solve multiobjective optimization problems (MOPs). Unlike most EMO algorithms that focus on the Pareto dominance relation, the proposed algorithm mainly considers distance-based measures to evaluate and compare individuals during the evolutionary search. Specifically in ETEA, four strategies are introduced: 1) An EMST-based crowding distance (ETCD) is presented to estimate the density of individuals in the population; 2) A distance comparison approach incorporating ETCD is used to assign the fitness value for individuals; 3) A fitness adjustment technique is designed to avoid the partial overcrowding in environmental selection; 4) Three diversity indicators-the minimum edge, degree, and ETCD-with regard to EMSTs are applied to determine the survival of individuals in archive truncation. From a series of extensive experiments on 32 test instances with different characteristics, ETEA is found to be competitive against five state-of-the-art algorithms and its predecessor in providing a good balance among convergence, uniformity, and spread.Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) of the United Kingdom under
Grant EP/K001310/1, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61070088
Evolutionary computation in dynamic and uncertain environments
This book can be accessed from the link below - Copyright @ 2007 Springer-Verla
Improved sampling of the pareto-front in multiobjective genetic optimizations by steady-state evolution: a Pareto converging genetic algorithm
Previous work on multiobjective genetic algorithms has been focused on preventing genetic drift and the issue of convergence has been given little attention. In this paper, we present a simple steady-state strategy, Pareto Converging Genetic Algorithm (PCGA), which naturally samples the solution space and ensures population advancement towards the Pareto-front. PCGA eliminates the need for sharing/niching and thus minimizes heuristically chosen parameters and procedures. A systematic approach based on histograms of rank is introduced for assessing convergence to the Pareto-front, which, by definition, is unknown in most real search problems.
We argue that there is always a certain inheritance of genetic material belonging to a population, and there is unlikely to be any significant gain beyond some point; a stopping criterion where terminating the computation is suggested. For further encouraging diversity and competition, a nonmigrating island model may optionally be used; this approach is particularly suited to many difficult (real-world) problems, which have a tendency to get stuck at (unknown) local minima. Results on three benchmark problems are presented and compared with those of earlier approaches. PCGA is found to produce diverse sampling of the Pareto-front without niching and with significantly less computational effort
- …