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

Analysing Symbolic Regression Benchmarks under a Meta-Learning Approach

The definition of a concise and effective testbed for Genetic Programming (GP) is a recurrent matter in the research community. This paper takes a new step in this direction, proposing a different approach to measure the quality of the symbolic regression benchmarks quantitatively. The proposed approach is based on meta-learning and uses a set of dataset meta-features---such as the number of examples or output skewness---to describe the datasets. Our idea is to correlate these meta-features with the errors obtained by a GP method. These meta-features define a space of benchmarks that should, ideally, have datasets (points) covering different regions of the space. An initial analysis of 63 datasets showed that current benchmarks are concentrated in a small region of this benchmark space. We also found out that number of instances and output skewness are the most relevant meta-features to GP output error. Both conclusions can help define which datasets should compose an effective testbed for symbolic regression methods.Comment: 8 pages, 3 Figures, Proceedings of Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion, Kyoto, Japa

Computational Intelligence for Life Sciences

Computational Intelligence (CI) is a computer science discipline encompassing the theory, design, development and application of biologically and linguistically derived computational paradigms. Traditionally, the main elements of CI are Evolutionary Computation, Swarm Intelligence, Fuzzy Logic, and Neural Networks. CI aims at proposing new algorithms able to solve complex computational problems by taking inspiration from natural phenomena. In an intriguing turn of events, these nature-inspired methods have been widely adopted to investigate a plethora of problems related to nature itself. In this paper we present a variety of CI methods applied to three problems in life sciences, highlighting their effectiveness: we describe how protein folding can be faced by exploiting Genetic Programming, the inference of haplotypes can be tackled using Genetic Algorithms, and the estimation of biochemical kinetic parameters can be performed by means of Swarm Intelligence. We show that CI methods can generate very high quality solutions, providing a sound methodology to solve complex optimization problems in life sciences

Nonlinear Dynamic System Identification and Model Predictive Control Using Genetic Programming

During the last century, a lot of developments have been made in research of complex nonlinear process control. As a powerful control methodology, model predictive control (MPC) has been extensively applied to chemical industrial applications. Core to MPC is a predictive model of the dynamics of the system being controlled. Most practical systems exhibit complex nonlinear dynamics, which imposes big challenges in system modelling. Being able to automatically evolve both model structure and numeric parameters, Genetic Programming (GP) shows great potential in identifying nonlinear dynamic systems. This thesis is devoted to GP based system identification and model-based control of nonlinear systems. To improve the generalization ability of GP models, a series of experiments that use semantic-based local search within a multiobjective GP framework are reported. The influence of various ways of selecting target subtrees for local search as well as different methods for performing that search were investigated; a comparison with the Random Desired Operator (RDO) of Pawlak et al. was made by statistical hypothesis testing. Compared with the corresponding baseline GP algorithms, models produced by a standard steady state or generational GP followed by a carefully-designed single-objective GP implementing semantic-based local search are statistically more accurate and with smaller (or equal) tree size, compared with the RDO-based GP algorithms. Considering the practical application, how to correctly and efficiently apply an evolved GP model to other larger systems is a critical research concern. Currently, the replication of GP models is normally done by repeating other’s work given the necessary algorithm parameters. However, due to the empirical and stochastic nature of GP, it is difficult to completely reproduce research findings. An XML-based standard file format, named Genetic Programming Markup Language (GPML), is proposed for the interchange of GP trees. A formal definition of this standard and details of implementation are described. GPML provides convenience and modularity for further applications based on GP models. The large-scale adoption of MPC in buildings is not economically viable due to the time and cost involved in designing and adjusting predictive models by expert control engineers. A GP-based control framework is proposed for automatically evolving dynamic nonlinear models for the MPC of buildings. An open-loop system identification was conducted using the data generated by a building simulator, and the obtained GP model was then employed to construct the predictive model for the MPC. The experimental result shows GP is able to produce models that allow the MPC of building to achieve the desired temperature band in a single zone space