skip to main content
10.1145/3377930.3390152acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Symbolic regression driven by training data and prior knowledge

Authors Info & Claims
Published:26 June 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

In symbolic regression, the search for analytic models is typically driven purely by the prediction error observed on the training data samples. However, when the data samples do not sufficiently cover the input space, the prediction error does not provide sufficient guidance toward desired models. Standard symbolic regression techniques then yield models that are partially incorrect, for instance, in terms of their steady-state characteristics or local behavior. If these properties were considered already during the search process, more accurate and relevant models could be produced. We propose a multi-objective symbolic regression approach that is driven by both the training data and the prior knowledge of the properties the desired model should manifest. The properties given in the form of formal constraints are internally represented by a set of discrete data samples on which candidate models are exactly checked. The proposed approach was experimentally evaluated on three test problems with results clearly demonstrating its capability to evolve realistic models that fit the training data well while complying with the prior knowledge of the desired model characteristics at the same time. It outperforms standard symbolic regression by several orders of magnitude in terms of the mean squared deviation from a reference model.

References

  1. Alibekov, E., Kubalík, J., and Babuska, R. Policy derivation methods for critic-only reinforcement learning in continuous spaces. Eng. Appl. of AI 69 (2018), 178--187.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Alibekov, E., Kubalík, J., and Babuška, R. Symbolic method for deriving policy in reinforcement learning. In 2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) (Dec 2016), pp. 2789--2795.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Arnaldo, I., Krawiec, K., and O'Reilly, U.-M. Multiple regression genetic programming. In Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (New York, NY, USA, 2014), GECCO '14, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 879--886.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnaldo, I., O'Reilly, U.-M., and Veeramachaneni, K. Building predictive models via feature synthesis. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (New York, NY, USA, 2015), GECCO '15, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 983--990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Babuška, R. Fuzzy Modeling for Control. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, USA, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Błądek, I., and Krawiec, K. Solving symbolic regression problems with formal constraints. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2019), GECCO '19, ACM, pp. 977--984.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Boedecker, J., Springenberg, J. T., Wülfing, J., and Riedmiller, M. Approximate real-time optimal control based on sparse gaussian process models. In 2014 IEEE Symposium on Adaptive Dynamic Programming and Reinforcement Learning (ADPRL) (Dec 2014), pp. 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Damsteeg, J., Nageshrao, S., and Babuška, R. Model-based real-time control of a magnetic manipulator system. In Proceedings 56th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) (Melbourne, Australia, Dec. 2017), pp. 3277--3282.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. de Bruin, T., Kober, J., Tuyls, K., and Babuška, R. Integrating state representation learning into deep reinforcement learning. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 3, 3 (July 2018), 1394--1401.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., and Meyarivan, T. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 6, 2 (April 2002), 182--197.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Deisenroth, M. P., and Rasmussen, C. E. PILCO: A model-based and data-efficient approach to policy search. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2011, Bellevue, Washington, USA, June 28-July 2, 2011 (2011), pp. 465--472.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Derner, E., Kubalík, J., and Babuska, R. Data-driven construction of symbolic process models for reinforcement learning. In Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (Brisbane, Australia, May 2018), pp. 5105--5112.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Derner, E., Kubalík, J., and Babuska, R. Reinforcement learning with symbolic input-output models. In Proceedings IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (2018), pp. 3004--3009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Grondman, I., Vaandrager, M., Busoniu, L., Babuska, R., and Schuitema, E. Efficient model learning methods for actor-critic control. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 42, 3 (June 2012), 591--602.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Hurak, Z., and Zemanek, J. Feedback linearization approach to distributed feedback manipulation. In American control conference (Montreal, Canada, 2012), pp. 991--996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson, D. A new, node-focused model for genetic programming. In Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Genetic Programming (Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012), EuroGP'12, Springer-Verlag, p. 49--60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Krawiec, K., Błądek, I., and Swan, J. Counterexample-driven genetic programming. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2017), GECCO '17, ACM, pp. 953--960.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Kubalík, J., Alibekov, E., Žegklitz, J., and Babuška, R. Hybrid single node genetic programming for symbolic regression. In Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence XXIV - Volume 9770 (Berlin, Heidelberg, 2016), Springer-Verlag, p. 61--82.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Kubalík., J., Derner., E., and Babuška., R. Enhanced symbolic regression through local variable transformations. In Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conference on Computational Intelligence - Volume 1: IJCCI, (2017), INSTICC, SciTePress, pp. 91--100.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Levine, S., and Abbeel, P. Learning neural network policies with guided policy search under unknown dynamics. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems - Volume 1 (Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014), NIPS'14, MIT Press, p. 1071--1079.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Lillicrap, T. P., Hunt, J. J., Pritzel, A., Heess, N., Erez, T., Tassa, Y., Silver, D., and Wierstra, D. Continuous control with deep reinforcement learning, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Lioutikov, R., Paraschos, A., Peters, J., and Neumann, G. Sample-based informationl-theoretic stochastic optimal control. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (May 2014), pp. 3896--3902.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Schmidt, M., and Lipson, H. Distilling free-form natural laws from experimental data. Science 324, 5923 (2009), 81--85.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Searson, D. P. Gptips 2: An open-source software platform for symbolic data mining. In Handbook of Genetic Programming Applications (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Staelens, N., Deschrijver, D., Vladislavleva, E., Vermeulen, B., Dhaene, T., and Demeester, P. Constructing a no-reference h.264/avc bitstream-based video quality metric using genetic programming-based symbolic regression. IEEE Trans. Cir. and Sys. for Video Technol. 23, 8 (Aug. 2013), 1322--1333.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Vladislavleva, E., Friedrich, T., Neumann, F., and Wagner, M. Predicting the energy output of wind farms based on weather data: Important variables and their correlation. Renewable Energy 50 (2013), 236 -- 243.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Symbolic regression driven by training data and prior knowledge

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            GECCO '20: Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
            June 2020
            1349 pages
            ISBN:9781450371285
            DOI:10.1145/3377930

            Copyright © 2020 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 26 June 2020

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

            Upcoming Conference

            GECCO '24
            Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
            July 14 - 18, 2024
            Melbourne , VIC , Australia

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader