Lee Spector
Lee Spector
- The Push language website: http://pushlanguage.orgGoogle Scholar
- Helmuth, Thomas, Nicholas Freitag McPhee, and Lee Spector. 2018. Program Synthesis using Uniform Mutation by Addition and Deletion. In Proc. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Helmuth, Thomas, Nicholas Freitag McPhee, Edward Pantridge, and Lee Spector. 2017. Improving Generalization of Evolved Programs through Automatic Simplification. In Proc. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Helmuth, Thomas, Lee Spector, Nicholas Freitag McPhee, and Saul Shanabrook. Linear Genomes for Structured Programs. In Worzel, William, William Tozier, Brian W. Goldman, and Rick Riolo, Eds., Genetic Programming Theory and Practice XIV. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- McPhee, Nicholas Freitag, Mitchell D. Finzel, Maggie M. Casale, Thomas Helmuth and Lee Spector. A detailed analysis of a PushGP run. In Worzel, William, William Tozier, Brian W. Goldman, and Rick Riolo, Eds., Genetic Programming Theory and Practice XIV. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Spector, L., N. F. McPhee, T. Helmuth, M. M. Casale, and J. Oks. 2016. Evolution Evolves with Autoconstruction. In Companion Publication of the 2016 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM Press. pp. 1349--1356. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Helmuth, T., and L. Spector. 2015. General Program Synthesis Benchmark Suite. In Proc. 2015 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM Press. pp. 1039--1046. Google ScholarDigital Library
- La Cava, W., and L. Spector. 2015. Inheritable Epigenetics in Genetic Programming. In Genetic Programming Theory and Practice XII. New York: Springer. pp. 37--51.Google Scholar
- Helmuth, T., L. Spector, and J. Matheson. 2015. Solving Uncompromising Problems with Lexicase Selection. In IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 19(5), pp. 630--643.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Helmuth, T., and L. Spector. 2014. Word Count as a Traditional Programming Benchmark Problem for Genetic Programming. In Proc. 2014 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM Press. pp. 919--926. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spector, L., and T. Helmuth. 2014. Effective Simplification of Evolved Push Programs Using a Simple, Stochastic Hill-climber. In Companion Publication of the 2014 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM Press. pp. 147--148. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zhan, H. 2014. A quantitative analysis of the simplification genetic operator. In Companion Publication of the 2014 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM Press. pp. 1077--1080. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spector, L., K. Harrington, and T. Helmuth. 2012. Tag-based Modularity in Tree-based Genetic Programming. In Proc. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM Press. pp. 815--822. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spector, L., K. Harrington, B. Martin, and T. Helmuth. 2011. What's in an Evolved Name? The Evolution of Modularity via Tag-Based Reference. In Genetic Programming Theory and Practice IX. New York: Springer. pp. 1--16.Google Scholar
- Spector, L. 2010. Towards Practical Autoconstructive Evolution: Self-Evolution of Problem-Solving Genetic Programming Systems. In Genetic Programming Theory and Practice VIII, R. L. Riolo, T. McConaghy, and E. Vladislavleva, eds. Springer. pp. 17--33.Google Scholar
- Spector, L., D. M. Clark, I. Lindsay, B. Barr, and J. Klein. 2008. Genetic Programming for Finite Algebras. In Proc. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM Press. pp. 1291--1298. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spector, L., J. Klein, and M. Keijzer. 2005. The Push3 Execution Stack and the Evolution of Control. In Proc. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. Springer-Verlag. pp. 1689--1696. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spector, L. 2004. Automatic Quantum Computer Programming: A Genetic Programming Approach. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spector, L., and A. Robinson. 2002. Genetic Programming and Autoconstructive Evolution with the Push Programming Language. In Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 7--40. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spector, L. 2001. Autoconstructive Evolution: Push, PushGP, and Pushpop. In Proc. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. pp. 137--146.Google Scholar
- Robinson, A. 2001. Genetic Programming: Theory, Implementation, and the Evolution of Unconstrained Solutions. Hampshire College Division III (senior) thesis.Google Scholar
Recommendations
Optimising Optimisers with Push GP
Genetic ProgrammingAbstractThis work uses Push GP to automatically design both local and population-based optimisers for continuous-valued problems. The optimisers are trained on a single function optimisation landscape, using random transformations to discourage ...
Genetic Programming and Autoconstructive Evolution with the Push Programming Language
Push is a programming language designed for the expression of evolving programs within an evolutionary computation system. This article describes Push and illustrates some of the opportunities that it presents for evolutionary computation. Two ...
Playing push vs pull: models and algorithms for disseminating dynamic data in networks
SPAA '06: Proceedings of the eighteenth annual ACM symposium on Parallelism in algorithms and architecturesConsider a network in which a collection of source nodes maintain and periodically update data objects for a collection of sink nodes, each of which periodically accesses the data originating from some specified subset of the source nodes. We consider ...
Comments