Evolvability and rate of evolution in evolutionary computation

Evolvability has emerged as a research topic in both natural and computational evolution. It is a notion put forward to investigate the fundamental mechanisms that enable a system to evolve. A number of hypotheses have been proposed in modern biological research based on the examination of various mechanisms in the biosphere for their contribution to evolvability. Therefore, it is intriguing to try to transfer new discoveries from Biology to and test them in Evolutionary Computation (EC) systems, so that computational models would be improved and a better understanding of general evolutional mechanisms is achieved. -- Rate of evolution comes in different flavors in natural and computational evolution. Specifically, we distinguish the rate of fitness progression from that of genetic substitutions. The former is a common concept in EC since the ability to explicitly quantify the fitness of an evolutionary individual is one of the most important differences between computational systems and natural systems. Within the biological research community, the definition of rate of evolution varies, depending on the objects being examined such as gene sequences, proteins, tissues, etc. For instance, molecular biologists tend to use the rate of genetic substitutions to quantify how fast evolution proceeds at the genetic level. This concept of rate of evolution focuses on the evolutionary dynamics underlying fitness development, due to the inability to mathematically define fitness in a natural system. In EC, the rate of genetic substitutions suggests an unconventional and potentially powerful method to measure the rate of evolution by accessing lower levels of evolutionary dynamics. -- Central to this thesis is our new definition of rate of evolution in EC. We transfer the method of measurement of the rate of genetic substitutions from molecular biology to EC. The implementation in a Genetic Programming (GP) system shows that such measurements can indeed be performed and reflect well how evolution proceeds. Below the level of fitness development it provides observables at the genetic level of a GP population during evolution. We apply this measurement method to investigate the effects of four major configuration parameters in EC, i.e., mutation rate, crossover rate, tournament selection size, and population size, and show that some insights can be gained into the effectiveness of these parameters with respect to evolution acceleration. Further, we observe that population size plays an important role in determining the rate of evolution. We formulate a new indicator based on this rate of evolution measurement to adjust population size dynamically during evolution. Such a strategy can stabilize the rate of genetic substitutions and effectively improve the performance of a GP system over fixed-size populations. This rate of evolution measure also provides an avenue to study evolvability, since it captures how the two sides of evolvability, i.e., variability and neutrality, interact and cooperate with each other during evolution. We show that evolvability can be better understood in the light of this interplay and how this can be used to generate adaptive phenotypic variation via harnessing random genetic variation. The rate of evolution measure and the adaptive population size scheme are further transferred to a Genetic Algorithm (GA) to solve a real world application problem - the wireless network planning problem. Computer simulation of such an application proves that the adaptive population size scheme is able to improve a GA's performance against conventional fixed population size algorithms

Robustness - a challenge also for the 21st century: A review of robustness phenomena in technical, biological and social systems as well as robust approaches in engineering, computer science, operations research and decision aiding

Notions on robustness exist in many facets. They come from different disciplines and reflect different worldviews. Consequently, they contradict each other very often, which makes the term less applicable in a general context. Robustness approaches are often limited to specific problems for which they have been developed. This means, notions and definitions might reveal to be wrong if put into another domain of validity, i.e. context. A definition might be correct in a specific context but need not hold in another. Therefore, in order to be able to speak of robustness we need to specify the domain of validity, i.e. system, property and uncertainty of interest. As proofed by Ho et al. in an optimization context with finite and discrete domains, without prior knowledge about the problem there exists no solution what so ever which is more robust than any other. Similar to the results of the No Free Lunch Theorems of Optimization (NLFTs) we have to exploit the problem structure in order to make a solution more robust. This optimization problem is directly linked to a robustness/fragility tradeoff which has been observed in many contexts, e.g. 'robust, yet fragile' property of HOT (Highly Optimized Tolerance) systems. Another issue is that robustness is tightly bounded to other phenomena like complexity for which themselves exist no clear definition or theoretical framework. Consequently, this review rather tries to find common aspects within many different approaches and phenomena than to build a general theorem for robustness, which anyhow might not exist because complex phenomena often need to be described from a pluralistic view to address as many aspects of a phenomenon as possible. First, many different robustness problems have been reviewed from many different disciplines. Second, different common aspects will be discussed, in particular the relationship of functional and structural properties. This paper argues that robustness phenomena are also a challenge for the 21st century. It is a useful quality of a model or system in terms of the 'maintenance of some desired system characteristics despite fluctuations in the behaviour of its component parts or its environment' (s. [Carlson and Doyle, 2002], p. 2). We define robustness phenomena as solution with balanced tradeoffs and robust design principles and robustness measures as means to balance tradeoffs. --

Probabilidades Variacionales y Propensiones del Desarrollo: Un Estudio Filosófico del Azar en la Variación Evolutiva

Tesis inédita de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Filosofía, leída el 09/11/2020The ongoing debate over a possible extension of the explanatory corpus of evolutionary biology touches many aspects of philosophical interest, among which is the role that chance plays in its models and explanations. In particular, how evolutionary variation relates to chance seems to differ under the classical and the evo-devo perspectives. While some tools of the philosophy of probability and chance have been incorporated into important aspects of evolutionary biology, this discrepancy has not been considered from this perspective. In this dissertation, Iintend to bridge part of this gap by endorsing a conception of chance in the generation of evolutionary variation that is the result of incorporating several conceptual tools from the philosophy of probability and chance into different views over the nature of evolutionary variation. My aim is to clarify the distinct roles that chance in variation plays in the field of evo-devo as compared with classical evolutionary genetics. I depart from the construction of a suitable philosophical framework about the representative role of probabilities in evolutionary disciplines and the type of explanatory causes that are responsible for them...El actual debate sobre una posible extensión del corpus explicativo de la biología evolutiva recoge muchos aspectos de interés filosófico, entre los que se encuentra el rol del azar en sus modelos y explicaciones. En particular, la relación entre la variación evolutiva y el azar parece ser muy distinto bajo las perspectivas clásica y dela evo-devo. Mientras que algunas herramientas de la filosofía de la probabilidad y el azar han sido incorporadas en aspectos importantes de la biología evolutiva, esta disparidad no ha sido considerada desde esta perspectiva. En esta tesis, mi intención es aliviar parcialmente esta carencia defendiendo una noción de azar en la generación de la variación evolutiva que es el resultado de incorporar varias herramientas conceptuales de la filosofía de la probabilidad a distintas perspectivas sobre su naturaleza. Mi objetivo es clarificar los distintos roles que el azar en la variación juega en el campo de la evo-devo en comparación con la genética evolutiva clásica. Comienzo con la construcción de un marco filosófico que considera el rol representativo de la probabilidad en las disciplinas evolutivas y el tipo de causas explicativas que son responsables de ella...Fac. de FilosofíaTRUEunpu

From genotypes to organisms: State-of-the-art and perspectives of a cornerstone in evolutionary dynamics

Understanding how genotypes map onto phenotypes, fitness, and eventually organisms is arguably the next major missing piece in a fully predictive theory of evolution. We refer to this generally as the problem of the genotype-phenotype map. Though we are still far from achieving a complete picture of these relationships, our current understanding of simpler questions, such as the structure induced in the space of genotypes by sequences mapped to molecular structures, has revealed important facts that deeply affect the dynamical description of evolutionary processes. Empirical evidence supporting the fundamental relevance of features such as phenotypic bias is mounting as well, while the synthesis of conceptual and experimental progress leads to questioning current assumptions on the nature of evolutionary dynamics-cancer progression models or synthetic biology approaches being notable examples. This work delves into a critical and constructive attitude in our current knowledge of how genotypes map onto molecular phenotypes and organismal functions, and discusses theoretical and empirical avenues to broaden and improve this comprehension. As a final goal, this community should aim at deriving an updated picture of evolutionary processes soundly relying on the structural properties of genotype spaces, as revealed by modern techniques of molecular and functional analysis.Comment: 111 pages, 11 figures uses elsarticle latex clas

Evolutionary robotics and neuroscience

No description supplie

Hierarchy Theory of Evolution and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis: Some Epistemic Bridges, Some Conceptual Rifts

Contemporary evolutionary biology comprises a plural landscape of multiple co-existent conceptual frameworks and strenuous voices that disagree on the nature and scope of evolutionary theory. Since the mid-eighties, some of these conceptual frameworks have denounced the ontologies of the Modern Synthesis and of the updated Standard Theory of Evolution as unfinished or even flawed. In this paper, we analyze and compare two of those conceptual frameworks, namely Niles Eldredge’s Hierarchy Theory of Evolution (with its extended ontology of evolutionary entities) and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (with its proposal of an extended ontology of evolutionary processes), in an attempt to map some epistemic bridges (e.g. compatible views of causation; niche construction) and some conceptual rifts (e.g. extra-genetic inheritance; different perspectives on macroevolution; contrasting standpoints held in the “externalism–internalism” debate) that exist between them. This paper seeks to encourage theoretical, philosophical and historiographical discussions about pluralism or the possible unification of contemporary evolutionary biology