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

An Overview of Schema Theory

The purpose of this paper is to give an introduction to the field of Schema Theory written by a mathematician and for mathematicians. In particular, we endeavor to to highlight areas of the field which might be of interest to a mathematician, to point out some related open problems, and to suggest some large-scale projects. Schema theory seeks to give a theoretical justification for the efficacy of the field of genetic algorithms, so readers who have studied genetic algorithms stand to gain the most from this paper. However, nothing beyond basic probability theory is assumed of the reader, and for this reason we write in a fairly informal style. Because the mathematics behind the theorems in schema theory is relatively elementary, we focus more on the motivation and philosophy. Many of these results have been proven elsewhere, so this paper is designed to serve a primarily expository role. We attempt to cast known results in a new light, which makes the suggested future directions natural. This involves devoting a substantial amount of time to the history of the field. We hope that this exposition will entice some mathematicians to do research in this area, that it will serve as a road map for researchers new to the field, and that it will help explain how schema theory developed. Furthermore, we hope that the results collected in this document will serve as a useful reference. Finally, as far as the author knows, the questions raised in the final section are new.Comment: 27 pages. Originally written in 2009 and hosted on my website, I've decided to put it on the arXiv as a more permanent home. The paper is primarily expository, so I don't really know where to submit it, but perhaps one day I will find an appropriate journa

CES-480 Covariant Parsimony Pressure for Genetic Programming

The parsimony pressure method is perhaps the simplest and most frequently used method to control bloat in genetic programming. In this paper we ?rst reconsider the size evolution equation for genetic programming developed in [24] and rewrite it in a form that shows its direct relationship to Price's theorem. We then use this new formulation to derive theoretical results that show how to practically and optimally set the parsimony coe?cient dynamically during a run so as to achieve complete control over the growth of the programs in a population. Experimental results con?rm the e?ectiveness of the method, as we are able to tightly control the average program size under a variety of conditions. These include such unusual cases as dynamically varying target sizes such that the mean program size is allowed to grow during some phases of a run, while being forced to shrink in others

Simplification of genetic programs: a literature survey

Genetic programming (GP), a widely used evolutionary computing technique, suffers from bloat—the problem of excessive growth in individuals’ sizes. As a result, its ability to efficiently explore complex search spaces reduces. The resulting solutions are less robust and generalisable. Moreover, it is difficult to understand and explain models which contain bloat. This phenomenon is well researched, primarily from the angle of controlling bloat: instead, our focus in this paper is to review the literature from an explainability point of view, by looking at how simplification can make GP models more explainable by reducing their sizes. Simplification is a code editing technique whose primary purpose is to make GP models more explainable. However, it can offer bloat control as an additional benefit when implemented and applied with caution. Researchers have proposed several simplification techniques and adopted various strategies to implement them. We organise the literature along multiple axes to identify the relative strengths and weaknesses of simplification techniques and to identify emerging trends and areas for future exploration. We highlight design and integration challenges and propose several avenues for research. One of them is to consider simplification as a standalone operator, rather than an extension of the standard crossover or mutation operators. Its role is then more clearly complementary to other GP operators, and it can be integrated as an optional feature into an existing GP setup. Another proposed avenue is to explore the lack of utilisation of complexity measures in simplification. So far, size is the most discussed measure, with only two pieces of prior work pointing out the benefits of using time as a measure when controlling bloat

CSM-365 - Using schema theory to explore interactions of multiple operators

In the last two years the schema theory for Genetic Programming (GP) has been applied to the problem of understanding the length biases of a variety of crossover and mutation operators on variable length linear structures. In these initial papers, operators were studied in isolation. In practice, however, they are typically used in various combinations, and in this paper we present the first schema theory analysis of the complex interactions of multiple operators. In particular we apply the schema theory to the use of standard subtree crossover, full mutation, and grow mutation (in varying proportions) to variable length linear structures in the one-then-zeros problem. We then show how the results can be used to guide choices about the relative proportion of these operators in order to achieve certain structural goals during a run

Multi-objective genetic programming with partial sampling and its extension to many-objective

This paper describes a technique on an optimization of tree-structure data by of multi-objective evolutionary algorithm, or multi-objective genetic programming. GP induces bloat of the tree structure as one of the major problem. The cause of bloat is that the tree structure obtained by the crossover operator grows bigger and bigger but its evaluation does not improve. To avoid the risk of bloat, a partial sampling operator is proposed as a mating operator. The size of the tree and a structural distance are introduced into the measure of the tree-structure data as the objective functions in addition to the index of the goodness of tree structure. GP is defined as a three-objective optimization problem. SD is also applied for the ranking of parent individuals instead to the crowding distance of the conventional NSGA-II. When the index of the goodness of tree-structure data is two or more, the number of objective functions in the above problem becomes four or more. We also propose an effective many-objective EA applicable to such the many-objective GP. We focus on NSGA-II based on Pareto partial dominance (NSGA-II-PPD). NSGA-II-PPD requires beforehand a combination list of the number of objective functions to be used for Pareto partial dominance (PPD). The contents of the combination list greatly influence the optimization result. We propose to schedule a parameter r meaning the subset size of objective functions for PPD and to eliminate individuals created by the mating having the same contents as the individual of the archive set

Evolutionary improvement of programs

Most applications of genetic programming (GP) involve the creation of an entirely new function, program or expression to solve a specific problem. In this paper, we propose a new approach that applies GP to improve existing software by optimizing its non-functional properties such as execution time, memory usage, or power consumption. In general, satisfying non-functional requirements is a difficult task and often achieved in part by optimizing compilers. However, modern compilers are in general not always able to produce semantically equivalent alternatives that optimize non-functional properties, even if such alternatives are known to exist: this is usually due to the limited local nature of such optimizations. In this paper, we discuss how best to combine and extend the existing evolutionary methods of GP, multiobjective optimization, and coevolution in order to improve existing software. Given as input the implementation of a function, we attempt to evolve a semantically equivalent version, in this case optimized to reduce execution time subject to a given probability distribution of inputs. We demonstrate that our framework is able to produce non-obvious optimizations that compilers are not yet able to generate on eight example functions. We employ a coevolved population of test cases to encourage the preservation of the function's semantics. We exploit the original program both through seeding of the population in order to focus the search, and as an oracle for testing purposes. As well as discussing the issues that arise when attempting to improve software, we employ rigorous experimental method to provide interesting and practical insights to suggest how to address these issues