ABSTRACT
The performance of searching agents, or metaheuristics, like evolutionary algorithms (genetics algorithms, genetic programming, etc.) or local search algorithms (simulated annealing, tabu search, etc.) depend on some properties of the search space structure. One concept that allows us to analyse the search space is the fitness landscape. In the case of Genetic Programming, defining and handling fitness landscapes is a particularly hard task, given the complexity of the structures being evolved of the genetic operators used. This tutorial presents some general definitions of fitness landscape. Subsequently, we will try to instantiate the concept of fitness landscape to Genetic Programming, discussing problems. The concept of landcsape geometry will be introduced and some of the most common landscape geometries and the dynamics of Genetic Programming on those landscapes will be discussed. After that, the binding between fitness landscapes and problem difficulty will be discussed and a set of measures that characterize the difficulty of a metaheuristic in searching solutions in a fitness landscape are analysed. Among those measures, particular relevance will be given to Fitness Distance Correlation (FDC), Negative Slope Coefficient (NSC), a set of measures bound to the concept of Neutrality and some distance metrics and/or similarity measures that are consistent with the most commonly used genetic operators (in particular the recently defined subtree crossover based distance). Finally, some open questions about fitness landscapes are discussed.
- J. M. Daida, R. Bertram, S. Stanhope, J. Khoo, S. Chaudhary, O. Chaudhary, What makes a problem GP-hard? Analysis of a tunably difficult problem in genetic programming. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 2:165--191, 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. M. Daida, H. Li, R. Tang, A. M. Hilss, What makes a problem GP-hard? Validating a hypothesis of structural causes. In R. Poli et al. editors Genetic and Evolutionary Computation - GECCO-2003, volume 2724 of LNCS, pages 1665--1677. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. E. Kinnear, Fitness landscapes and difficulty in genetic programming. In Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computing, pages 142--147. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NY.Google Scholar
- J. R. Koza, Genetic Programming The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1992. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. B. Langdon, R. Poli, Foundations of Genetic Programming Springer, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. I. Nikolaev, V. Slavov, Concepts of inductive genetic programming. In W. B. Langdon et al. editors, Genetic Programming, Proceedings of EuroGP'1998, volume 1391 of LNCS, pages 49--59. Springer-Verlag, 1998. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Tomassini, L. Vanneschi, P. Collard, M. Clergue, A study of fitness-distance correlation as a difficulty measure in genetic programming Evolutionary Computation, 13(2): 213--239, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Vanneschi, M. Tomassini, P. Collard, S. Verel, Negative Slope Coefficient. A measure to characterize genetic programming fitness landscapes In P. Collet et al. editors, Genetic Programming, 9th European Conference, EuroGP 2006, pages 178--189, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Vanneschi, S. Gustafson, G. Mauri, Using subtree crossover distance to investigate genetic programming dynamics. In P. Collet et al. editors, Genetic Programming, 9th European Conference, EuroGP 2006, pages 238--249, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Yu, J. Miller, Neutrality and the evolvability of boolean function landscape. In J. Miller et al., editor, Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Genetic Programming (EuroGP-2001), volume 2038 of LNCS, pages 204--217, Lake Como, Italy, 2001. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York. Lecture notes in Computer Science vol. 2038. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. B. Langdon and R. Poli, Why Ants are Hard. In Genetic Programming 1998: Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference Morgan Kaufmann, J. R. Koza et al. editors, pages 193--201, 1998.Google Scholar
- S. Gustafson, A. Ekárt, E. K. Burke, G. Kendall, Problem Difficulty and Code Growth in Genetic Programming Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 2004, Volume: 5, Issue: 3, p. 271--290. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fitness landscapes and problem hardness in genetic programming
Recommendations
Fitness landscapes and problem hardness in genetic programming
GECCO '09: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference Companion on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference: Late Breaking PapersThe performance of searching agents, or metaheuristics, like evolutionary algorithms (genetics algorithms, genetic programming, etc.) or local search algorithms (simulated annealing, tabu search, etc.) depend on some properties of the search space ...
Fitness landscapes and graphs: multimodularity, ruggedness and neutrality
GECCO '09: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference Companion on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference: Late Breaking PapersThe performances of evolutionary algorithms (genetics algorithms, genetic programming, etc.) or local search algotihms (Simulated annealing, tabu search, etc.) depends on the properties of seach space structure. One concept to analyse the search space ...
A study of the neutrality of Boolean function landscapes in genetic programming
The neutrality of genetic programming Boolean function landscapes is investigated in this paper. Compared with some well-known contributions on the same issue, (i) we first define new measures which help in characterizing neutral landscapes; (ii) we use ...
Comments