Towards a Theory-Guided Benchmarking Suite for Discrete Black-Box Optimization Heuristics: Profiling (1+λ)(1+\lambda) EA Variants on OneMax and LeadingOnes

Theoretical and empirical research on evolutionary computation methods complement each other by providing two fundamentally different approaches towards a better understanding of black-box optimization heuristics. In discrete optimization, both streams developed rather independently of each other, but we observe today an increasing interest in reconciling these two sub-branches. In continuous optimization, the COCO (COmparing Continuous Optimisers) benchmarking suite has established itself as an important platform that theoreticians and practitioners use to exchange research ideas and questions. No widely accepted equivalent exists in the research domain of discrete black-box optimization. Marking an important step towards filling this gap, we adjust the COCO software to pseudo-Boolean optimization problems, and obtain from this a benchmarking environment that allows a fine-grained empirical analysis of discrete black-box heuristics. In this documentation we demonstrate how this test bed can be used to profile the performance of evolutionary algorithms. More concretely, we study the optimization behavior of several $(1+\lambda)$ EA variants on the two benchmark problems OneMax and LeadingOnes. This comparison motivates a refined analysis for the optimization time of the $(1+\lambda)$ EA on LeadingOnes

Runtime Analysis for Self-adaptive Mutation Rates

We propose and analyze a self-adaptive version of the $(1,\lambda)$ evolutionary algorithm in which the current mutation rate is part of the individual and thus also subject to mutation. A rigorous runtime analysis on the OneMax benchmark function reveals that a simple local mutation scheme for the rate leads to an expected optimization time (number of fitness evaluations) of $O(n\lambda/\log\lambda+n\log n)$ when $\lambda$ is at least $C \ln n$ for some constant $C > 0$. For all values of $\lambda \ge C \ln n$, this performance is asymptotically best possible among all $\lambda$-parallel mutation-based unbiased black-box algorithms. Our result shows that self-adaptation in evolutionary computation can find complex optimal parameter settings on the fly. At the same time, it proves that a relatively complicated self-adjusting scheme for the mutation rate proposed by Doerr, Gie{\ss}en, Witt, and Yang~(GECCO~2017) can be replaced by our simple endogenous scheme. On the technical side, the paper contributes new tools for the analysis of two-dimensional drift processes arising in the analysis of dynamic parameter choices in EAs, including bounds on occupation probabilities in processes with non-constant drift

Optimal Parameter Choices Through Self-Adjustment: Applying the 1/5-th Rule in Discrete Settings

While evolutionary algorithms are known to be very successful for a broad range of applications, the algorithm designer is often left with many algorithmic choices, for example, the size of the population, the mutation rates, and the crossover rates of the algorithm. These parameters are known to have a crucial influence on the optimization time, and thus need to be chosen carefully, a task that often requires substantial efforts. Moreover, the optimal parameters can change during the optimization process. It is therefore of great interest to design mechanisms that dynamically choose best-possible parameters. An example for such an update mechanism is the one-fifth success rule for step-size adaption in evolutionary strategies. While in continuous domains this principle is well understood also from a mathematical point of view, no comparable theory is available for problems in discrete domains. In this work we show that the one-fifth success rule can be effective also in discrete settings. We regard the $(1+(\lambda,\lambda))$~GA proposed in [Doerr/Doerr/Ebel: From black-box complexity to designing new genetic algorithms, TCS 2015]. We prove that if its population size is chosen according to the one-fifth success rule then the expected optimization time on \textsc{OneMax} is linear. This is better than what \emph{any} static population size $\lambda$ can achieve and is asymptotically optimal also among all adaptive parameter choices.Comment: This is the full version of a paper that is to appear at GECCO 201

Complexity of evolutionary equilibria in static fitness landscapes

A fitness landscape is a genetic space -- with two genotypes adjacent if they differ in a single locus -- and a fitness function. Evolutionary dynamics produce a flow on this landscape from lower fitness to higher; reaching equilibrium only if a local fitness peak is found. I use computational complexity to question the common assumption that evolution on static fitness landscapes can quickly reach a local fitness peak. I do this by showing that the popular NK model of rugged fitness landscapes is PLS-complete for K >= 2; the reduction from Weighted 2SAT is a bijection on adaptive walks, so there are NK fitness landscapes where every adaptive path from some vertices is of exponential length. Alternatively -- under the standard complexity theoretic assumption that there are problems in PLS not solvable in polynomial time -- this means that there are no evolutionary dynamics (known, or to be discovered, and not necessarily following adaptive paths) that can converge to a local fitness peak on all NK landscapes with K = 2. Applying results from the analysis of simplex algorithms, I show that there exist single-peaked landscapes with no reciprocal sign epistasis where the expected length of an adaptive path following strong selection weak mutation dynamics is $e^{O(n^{1/3})}$ even though an adaptive path to the optimum of length less than n is available from every vertex. The technical results are written to be accessible to mathematical biologists without a computer science background, and the biological literature is summarized for the convenience of non-biologists with the aim to open a constructive dialogue between the two disciplines.Comment: 14 pages, 3 figure

Offspring Population Size Matters when Comparing Evolutionary Algorithms with Self-Adjusting Mutation Rates

We analyze the performance of the 2-rate $(1+\lambda)$ Evolutionary Algorithm (EA) with self-adjusting mutation rate control, its 3-rate counterpart, and a $(1+\lambda)$~EA variant using multiplicative update rules on the OneMax problem. We compare their efficiency for offspring population sizes ranging up to $\lambda=3,200$ and problem sizes up to $n=100,000$. Our empirical results show that the ranking of the algorithms is very consistent across all tested dimensions, but strongly depends on the population size. While for small values of $\lambda$ the 2-rate EA performs best, the multiplicative updates become superior for starting for some threshold value of $\lambda$ between 50 and 100. Interestingly, for population sizes around 50, the $(1+\lambda)$~EA with static mutation rates performs on par with the best of the self-adjusting algorithms. We also consider how the lower bound $p_{\min}$ for the mutation rate influences the efficiency of the algorithms. We observe that for the 2-rate EA and the EA with multiplicative update rules the more generous bound $p_{\min}=1/n^2$ gives better results than $p_{\min}=1/n$ when $\lambda$ is small. For both algorithms the situation reverses for large~$\lambda$.Comment: To appear at Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO'19). v2: minor language revisio