Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A comparison of grammatical genetic programming grammars for controlling femtocell network coverage

  • Published:
Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study grammars used in grammatical genetic programming (GP) which create algorithms that control the base station pilot power in a femtocell network. The overall goal of evolving algorithms for femtocells is to create a continuous online evolution of the femtocell pilot power control algorithm in order to optimize their coverage. We compare the performance of different grammars and analyse the femtocell simulation model using the grammatical genetic programming method called grammatical evolution. The grammars consist of conditional statements or mathematical functions as are used in symbolic regression applications of GP, as well as a hybrid containing both kinds of statements. To benchmark and gain further information about our femtocell network simulation model we also perform random sampling and limited enumeration of femtocell pilot power settings. The symbolic regression based grammars require the most configuration of the evolutionary algorithm and more fitness evaluations, whereas the conditional statement grammar requires more domain knowledge to set the parameters. The content of the resulting femtocell algorithms shows that the evolutionary computation (EC) methods are exploiting the assumptions in the model. The ability of EC to exploit bias in both the fitness function and the underlying model is vital for identifying the current system and improves the model and the EC method. Finally, the results show that the best fitness and engineering performances for the grammars are similar over both test and training scenarios. In addition, the evolved solutions’ performance is superior to those designed by humans.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. E. Alba, J.F. Chicano, in Evolutionary Algorithms in Telecommunications. IEEE Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conference (MELECON 2006), pp. 795–798. IEEE (2006)

  2. L. Breiman, Statistical modeling: the two cultures. Statist. Sci. 16(3), 199–215 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. J. Byrne, M. O’Neill, J. McDermott, A. Brabazon, An analysis of the behaviour of mutation in grammatical evolution. Genet. Program. 6021, 14–25 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. V. Chandrasekhar, J. Andrews, A. Gatherer, Femtocell networks: a survey. IEEE Commun. Mag. 46(9), 59–67 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. H. Claussen, F. Pivit, L.T.W. Ho, Self-optimization of femtocell coverage to minimize the increase in core network mobility signalling. Bell Labs Tech. J. 14(2), 155–183 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. J.M. Daida, D.S. Ampy, M. Ratanasavetavadhana, H. Li, O.A. Chaudhri, in Challenges with Verification, Repeatability, and Meaningful Comparison in Genetic Programming: Gibson’s Magic. GECCO, vol. 2, pp. 1851–1858. Citeseer (1999)

  7. K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, T. Meyarivan, A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 6(2), 182–197 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. I. Dempsey, M. O’Neill, A. Brabazon, in Grammatical Constant Creation, ed. by D. Kalyanmoy et al. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation—GECCO-2004, part II, vol. 3103. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Springer, Seattle, 2004), pp. 447–458

    Google Scholar 

  9. I. Dempsey, M. O’Neill, A. Brabazon, Foundations in Grammatical Evolution for Dynamic Environments (Springer, Berlin, 2009)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. D. Fagen, P.A. Vicharelli, J. Weitzen, Automated wireless coverage optimization with controlled overlap. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 57(4), 2395–2403 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. S. Forrest, T.V. Nguyen, W. Weimer, C. Le Goues, A Genetic Programming Approach to Automated Software Repair (ACM, New York, NY, 2009), pp. 947–954

  12. H. Robin, in Ge, Explosive Grammars and the Lasting Legacy of Bad Initialisation. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence (WCCI 2010) (2010)

  13. E. Hemberg, L. Ho, M. O’Neill, H. Claussen, in A Symbolic Regression Approach to Manage Femtocell Coverage Using Grammatical Genetic Programming. GECCO, pp. 639–646. ACM (2011)

  14. L. Ho, I. Ashraf, H. Claussen, in Evolving Femtocell Coverage Optimization Algorithms Using Genetic Programming. IEEE 20th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, 2009, pp. 2132–2136. IEEE (2010)

  15. L.T.W. Ho, H. Claussen, in Effects of User-Deployed, Co-channel Femtocells on the Call Drop Probability in a Residential Scenario. IEEE 18th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC 2007), pp. 1–5. IEEE (2007)

  16. N.X. Hoai, RI McKay, D. Essam, H.A. Abbass, Toward an alternative comparison between different genetic programming systems. Genet. Program. 7, 67–77 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. Hu, E. Goodman, in Wireless Access Point Configuration by Genetic Programming. IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 1178–1184 (2004)

  18. R. Jain, D.M. Chiu, W.R. Hawe, in A Quantitative Measure of Fairness and Discrimination for Resource Allocation in Shared Computer System (Eastern Research Laboratory, Digital Equipment Corp., Hudson, MA, 1984)

  19. H.S. Jo, C. Mun, J. Moon, J.G. Yook, Self-optimized coverage coordination in femtocell networks. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun. 9(10), 2977–2982 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. M.F. Korns, Symbolic regression of conditional target expressions. Genet. Program. Theory Pract. VII 211–228 (2010)

  21. T. Lewis, N. Fanning, G. Clemo, in Enhancing IEEE802. 11 DCF Using Genetic Programming. IEEE 63rd Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC 2006), vol. 3, pp. 1261–1265. IEEE (2006)

  22. L. Ljung, Perspectives on system identification. Annu. Rev. Control. 34(1), 1–12 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  23. M. O’Neill, I. Dempsey, A. Brabazon, C. Ryan, in Analysis of a Digit Concatenation Approach to Constant Creation, vol. LNCS 2610 (Springer, Essex, UK 2003), pp. 173–182

  24. R.I. McKay, N.X. Hoai, P.A. Whigham, Y. Shan, M. O’Neill, Grammar-based Genetic Programming: a survey. Genet. Program. Evol. Mach. 11(3), 365–396 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. F. Mhiri, K. Sethom Ben Reguiga, R. Bouallegue, G. Pujolle, in A Power Management Algorithm for Green Femtocell Networks. The 10th IFIP Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop (Med-Hoc-Net), 2011, pp. 45–49. IEEE (2011)

  26. J. Murphy, M. O’Neill, H. Carr, Exploring grammatical evolution for horse gait optimisation. Genet. Program. 5481, 183–194 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  27. M. O’Neill, L. Vanneschi, S. Gustafson, W. Banzhaf, Open issues in genetic programming. Genet. Program. Evolv. Mach. 11(3), 339–363 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. M. O’Neill, C. Ryan, Automatic Generation of Caching Algorithms, ed. by K. Miettinen et al. Evolutionary Algorithms in Engineering and Computer Science (Wiley, Finland, 1999), pp. 127–134

    Google Scholar 

  29. M. O’Neill, C. Ryan, Grammatical Evolution: Evolutionary Automatic Programming in an Arbitrary Language (Kluwer, Norwell, 2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. D. Perez, M. Nicolau, M. O’Neill, A. Brabazon, Evolving behaviour trees for the mario ai competition using grammatical evolution. Appl. Evol. Comput. 6624, 123–132 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  31. R. Poli, W.B. Langdon, S. Dignum, in On the Limiting Distribution of Program Sizes in Tree-Based Genetic Programming. Technical Report CSM-464, Department of Computer Science, University of Essex (2006)

  32. G.I. Ponente, E. De Marinis, in Femtocell System Optimization by Genetic Algorithm in Clustered Scenarios. Future Network and Mobile Summit (FutureNetw), 2011, pp. 1–9. IEEE (2011)

  33. M. Schmidt, H. Lipson, Distilling free-form natural laws from experimental data. Science 324(5923), 81 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. I. Siomina, P. Varbrand, Automated optimization of service coverage and base station antenna configuration in umts networks. IEEE Commun. Wirel. 13(6), 16–25 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Y. Yasuda, Y. Sato, in Using Genetic Programming to Improve the Performance of Wireless LAN Access Point Configuration, ed. by The Long Pham et al. Proceedings of the Third Asian-Pacific Workshop on Genetic Programming, pp. 57–68. Vietnam (2006)

  36. A. Zhou, B.-Y. Qu, H. Li, S.-Z. Zhao, P.N. Suganthan, Q. Zhang, Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a survey of the state of the art. Swarm Evol. Comput. 1(1), 32–49 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research is based upon works supported by the Science Foundation Ireland under Grant No. 08/IN.1/I1868.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erik Hemberg.

Additional information

Recommended by Una-May O'Reilly and Steven Gustafson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hemberg, E., Ho, L., O’Neill, M. et al. A comparison of grammatical genetic programming grammars for controlling femtocell network coverage. Genet Program Evolvable Mach 14, 65–93 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10710-012-9171-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10710-012-9171-8

Keywords

Navigation