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

Numerical Simplification and its Effect on Fragment Distributions in Genetic Programming

In tree-based genetic programming (GP) there is a tendency for the program trees to increase in size from one generation to the next. If this increase in program size is not accompanied by an improvement in fitness then this unproductive increase is known as bloat. It is standard practice to place some form of control on program size. This can be done by limiting the number of nodes or the depth of the program trees, or by adding a component to the fitness function that rewards smaller programs (parsimony pressure) or by simplifying individual programs using algebraic methods. This thesis proposes a novel program simplification method called numerical simplification that uses only the range of values the nodes take during fitness evaluation. The effect of online program simplification, both algebraic and numerical, on program size and resource usage is examined. This thesis also examines the distribution of program fragments within a genetic programming population and how this is changed by using simplification. It is shown that both simplification approaches result in reductions in average program size, memory used and computation time and that numerical simplification performs at least as well as algebraic simplification, and in some cases will outperform algebraic simplification. This reduction in program size and the resources required to process the GP run come without any significant reduction in accuracy. It is also shown that although the two online simplification methods destroy some existing program fragments, they generate new fragments during evolution, which compensates for any negative effects from the disruption of existing fragments. It is also shown that, after the first few generations, the rate new fragments are created, the rate fragments are lost from the population, and the number of distinct (different) fragments in the population remain within a very narrow range of values for the remainder of the run

GPTIPS 2: an open-source software platform for symbolic data mining

GPTIPS is a free, open source MATLAB based software platform for symbolic data mining (SDM). It uses a multigene variant of the biologically inspired machine learning method of genetic programming (MGGP) as the engine that drives the automatic model discovery process. Symbolic data mining is the process of extracting hidden, meaningful relationships from data in the form of symbolic equations. In contrast to other data-mining methods, the structural transparency of the generated predictive equations can give new insights into the physical systems or processes that generated the data. Furthermore, this transparency makes the models very easy to deploy outside of MATLAB. The rationale behind GPTIPS is to reduce the technical barriers to using, understanding, visualising and deploying GP based symbolic models of data, whilst at the same time remaining highly customisable and delivering robust numerical performance for power users. In this chapter, notable new features of the latest version of the software are discussed with these aims in mind. Additionally, a simplified variant of the MGGP high level gene crossover mechanism is proposed. It is demonstrated that the new functionality of GPTIPS 2 (a) facilitates the discovery of compact symbolic relationships from data using multiple approaches, e.g. using novel gene-centric visualisation analysis to mitigate horizontal bloat and reduce complexity in multigene symbolic regression models (b) provides numerous methods for visualising the properties of symbolic models (c) emphasises the generation of graphically navigable libraries of models that are optimal in terms of the Pareto trade off surface of model performance and complexity and (d) expedites real world applications by the simple, rapid and robust deployment of symbolic models outside the software environment they were developed in.Comment: 26 pages, accepted for publication in the Springer Handbook of Genetic Programming Applications (2015, in press

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

Automated Discovery of Relationships, Models, and Principles in Ecology

Ecological systems are the quintessential complex systems, involving numerous high-order interactions and non-linear relationships. The most used statistical modeling techniques can hardly accommodate the complexity of ecological patterns and processes. Finding hidden relationships in complex data is now possible using massive computational power, particularly by means of artificial intelligence and machine learning methods. Here we explored the potential of symbolic regression (SR), commonly used in other areas, in the field of ecology. Symbolic regression searches for both the formal structure of equations and the fitting parameters simultaneously, hence providing the required flexibility to characterize complex ecological systems. Although the method here presented is automated, it is part of a collaborative human-machine effort and we demonstrate ways to do it. First, we test the robustness of SR to extreme levels of noise when searching for the species-area relationship. Second, we demonstrate how SR can model species richness and spatial distributions. Third, we illustrate how SR can be used to find general models in ecology, namely new formulas for species richness estimators and the general dynamic model of oceanic island biogeography. We propose that evolving free-form equations purely from data, often without prior human inference or hypotheses, may represent a very powerful tool for ecologists and biogeographers to become aware of hidden relationships and suggest general theoretical models and principles.Peer reviewe

Differentiable Genetic Programming for High-dimensional Symbolic Regression

Symbolic regression (SR) is the process of discovering hidden relationships from data with mathematical expressions, which is considered an effective way to reach interpretable machine learning (ML). Genetic programming (GP) has been the dominator in solving SR problems. However, as the scale of SR problems increases, GP often poorly demonstrates and cannot effectively address the real-world high-dimensional problems. This limitation is mainly caused by the stochastic evolutionary nature of traditional GP in constructing the trees. In this paper, we propose a differentiable approach named DGP to construct GP trees towards high-dimensional SR for the first time. Specifically, a new data structure called differentiable symbolic tree is proposed to relax the discrete structure to be continuous, thus a gradient-based optimizer can be presented for the efficient optimization. In addition, a sampling method is proposed to eliminate the discrepancy caused by the above relaxation for valid symbolic expressions. Furthermore, a diversification mechanism is introduced to promote the optimizer escaping from local optima for globally better solutions. With these designs, the proposed DGP method can efficiently search for the GP trees with higher performance, thus being capable of dealing with high-dimensional SR. To demonstrate the effectiveness of DGP, we conducted various experiments against the state of the arts based on both GP and deep neural networks. The experiment results reveal that DGP can outperform these chosen peer competitors on high-dimensional regression benchmarks with dimensions varying from tens to thousands. In addition, on the synthetic SR problems, the proposed DGP method can also achieve the best recovery rate even with different noisy levels. It is believed this work can facilitate SR being a powerful alternative to interpretable ML for a broader range of real-world problems