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

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

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

Evolving Plasticity for Autonomous Learning under Changing Environmental Conditions

A fundamental aspect of learning in biological neural networks is the plasticity property which allows them to modify their configurations during their lifetime. Hebbian learning is a biologically plausible mechanism for modeling the plasticity property in artificial neural networks (ANNs), based on the local interactions of neurons. However, the emergence of a coherent global learning behavior from local Hebbian plasticity rules is not very well understood. The goal of this work is to discover interpretable local Hebbian learning rules that can provide autonomous global learning. To achieve this, we use a discrete representation to encode the learning rules in a finite search space. These rules are then used to perform synaptic changes, based on the local interactions of the neurons. We employ genetic algorithms to optimize these rules to allow learning on two separate tasks (a foraging and a prey-predator scenario) in online lifetime learning settings. The resulting evolved rules converged into a set of well-defined interpretable types, that are thoroughly discussed. Notably, the performance of these rules, while adapting the ANNs during the learning tasks, is comparable to that of offline learning methods such as hill climbing.Comment: Evolutionary Computation Journa

Analysis of the (μ/μI,λ)(\mu/\mu_I,\lambda)-CSA-ES with Repair by Projection Applied to a Conically Constrained Problem

Theoretical analyses of evolution strategies are indispensable for gaining a deep understanding of their inner workings. For constrained problems, rather simple problems are of interest in the current research. This work presents a theoretical analysis of a multi-recombinative evolution strategy with cumulative step size adaptation applied to a conically constrained linear optimization problem. The state of the strategy is modeled by random variables and a stochastic iterative mapping is introduced. For the analytical treatment, fluctuations are neglected and the mean value iterative system is considered. Non-linear difference equations are derived based on one-generation progress rates. Based on that, expressions for the steady state of the mean value iterative system are derived. By comparison with real algorithm runs, it is shown that for the considered assumptions, the theoretical derivations are able to predict the dynamics and the steady state values of the real runs.Comment: This is a PREPRINT of an article that has been accepted for publication in the journal MIT Press Evolutionary Computation (ECJ). 25 pages + supplementary material. The work was supported by the Austrian Science Fund FWF under grant P29651-N3

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

Markov Chain Analysis of Cumulative Step-size Adaptation on a Linear Constrained Problem

This paper analyzes a (1, $\lambda$)-Evolution Strategy, a randomized comparison-based adaptive search algorithm, optimizing a linear function with a linear constraint. The algorithm uses resampling to handle the constraint. Two cases are investigated: first the case where the step-size is constant, and second the case where the step-size is adapted using cumulative step-size adaptation. We exhibit for each case a Markov chain describing the behaviour of the algorithm. Stability of the chain implies, by applying a law of large numbers, either convergence or divergence of the algorithm. Divergence is the desired behaviour. In the constant step-size case, we show stability of the Markov chain and prove the divergence of the algorithm. In the cumulative step-size adaptation case, we prove stability of the Markov chain in the simplified case where the cumulation parameter equals 1, and discuss steps to obtain similar results for the full (default) algorithm where the cumulation parameter is smaller than 1. The stability of the Markov chain allows us to deduce geometric divergence or convergence , depending on the dimension, constraint angle, population size and damping parameter, at a rate that we estimate. Our results complement previous studies where stability was assumed.Comment: Evolutionary Computation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press (MIT Press): STM Titles, 201

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