A Grouping Genetic Algorithm for Joint Stratification and Sample Allocation Designs

Predicting the cheapest sample size for the optimal stratification in multivariate survey design is a problem in cases where the population frame is large. A solution exists that iteratively searches for the minimum sample size necessary to meet accuracy constraints in partitions of atomic strata created by the Cartesian product of auxiliary variables into larger strata. The optimal stratification can be found by testing all possible partitions. However the number of possible partitions grows exponentially with the number of initial strata. There are alternative ways of modelling this problem, one of the most natural is using Genetic Algorithms (GA). These evolutionary algorithms use recombination, mutation and selection to search for optimal solutions. They often converge on optimal or near-optimal solution more quickly than exact methods. We propose a new GA approach to this problem using grouping genetic operators instead of traditional operators. The results show a significant improvement in solution quality for similar computational effort, corresponding to large monetary savings.Comment: 22 page

Incorporating characteristics of human creativity into an evolutionary art algorithm (journal article)

A perceived limitation of evolutionary art and design algorithms is that they rely on human intervention; the artist selects the most aesthetically pleasing variants of one generation to produce the next. This paper discusses how computer generated art and design can become more creatively human-like with respect to both process and outcome. As an example of a step in this direction, we present an algorithm that overcomes the above limitation by employing an automatic fitness function. The goal is to evolve abstract portraits of Darwin, using our 2nd generation fitness function which rewards genomes that not just produce a likeness of Darwin but exhibit certain strategies characteristic of human artists. We note that in human creativity, change is less choosing amongst randomly generated variants and more capitalizing on the associative structure of a conceptual network to hone in on a vision. We discuss how to achieve this fluidity algorithmically

A novel genetic algorithm for evolvable hardware

Evolutionary algorithms are used for solving search and optimization problems. A new field in which they are also applied is evolvable hardware, which refers to a self-configurable electronic system. However, evolvable hardware is not widely recognized as a tool for solving real-world applications, because of the scalability problem, which limits the size of the system that may be evolved. In this paper a new genetic algorithm, particularly designed for evolving logic circuits, is presented and tested for its scalability. The proposed algorithm designs and optimizes logic circuits based on a Programmable Logic Array (PLA) structure. Furthermore it allows the evolution of large logic circuits, without the use of any decomposition techniques. The experimental results, based on the evolution of several logic circuits taken from three different benchmarks, prove that the proposed algorithm is very fast, as only a few generations are required to fully evolve the logic circuits. In addition it optimizes the evolved circuits better than the optimization offered by other evolutionary algorithms based on a PLA and FPGA structures

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

Differentiable Genetic Programming

We introduce the use of high order automatic differentiation, implemented via the algebra of truncated Taylor polynomials, in genetic programming. Using the Cartesian Genetic Programming encoding we obtain a high-order Taylor representation of the program output that is then used to back-propagate errors during learning. The resulting machine learning framework is called differentiable Cartesian Genetic Programming (dCGP). In the context of symbolic regression, dCGP offers a new approach to the long unsolved problem of constant representation in GP expressions. On several problems of increasing complexity we find that dCGP is able to find the exact form of the symbolic expression as well as the constants values. We also demonstrate the use of dCGP to solve a large class of differential equations and to find prime integrals of dynamical systems, presenting, in both cases, results that confirm the efficacy of our approach

Incorporating characteristics of human creativity into an evolutionary art algorithm

A perceived limitation of evolutionary art and design algorithms is that they rely on human intervention; the artist selects the most aesthetically pleasing variants of one generation to produce the next. This paper discusses how computer generated art and design can become more creatively human-like with respect to both process and outcome. As an example of a step in this direction, we present an algorithm that overcomes the above limitation by employing an automatic fitness function. The goal is to evolve abstract portraits of Darwin, using our 2nd generation fitness function which rewards genomes that not just produce a likeness of Darwin but exhibit certain strategies characteristic of human artists. We note that in human creativity, change is less choosing amongst randomly generated variants and more capitalizing on the associative structure of a conceptual network to hone in on a vision. We discuss how to achieve this fluidity algorithmically

Generalized disjunction decomposition for evolvable hardware

Evolvable hardware (EHW) refers to self-reconfiguration hardware design, where the configuration is under the control of an evolutionary algorithm (EA). One of the main difficulties in using EHW to solve real-world problems is scalability, which limits the size of the circuit that may be evolved. This paper outlines a new type of decomposition strategy for EHW, the “generalized disjunction decomposition” (GDD), which allows the evolution of large circuits. The proposed method has been extensively tested, not only with multipliers and parity bit problems traditionally used in the EHW community, but also with logic circuits taken from the Microelectronics Center of North Carolina (MCNC) benchmark library and randomly generated circuits. In order to achieve statistically relevant results, each analyzed logic circuit has been evolved 100 times, and the average of these results is presented and compared with other EHW techniques. This approach is necessary because of the probabilistic nature of EA; the same logic circuit may not be solved in the same way if tested several times. The proposed method has been examined in an extrinsic EHW system using the$(1 + lambda)$evolution strategy. The results obtained demonstrate that GDD significantly improves the evolution of logic circuits in terms of the number of generations, reduces computational time as it is able to reduce the required time for a single iteration of the EA, and enables the evolution of larger circuits never before evolved. In addition to the proposed method, a short overview of EHW systems together with the most recent applications in electrical circuit design is provided