Skip to main content

A Rigorous Evaluation of Crossover and Mutation in Genetic Programming

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 5481))

Abstract

The role of crossover and mutation in Genetic Programming (GP) has been the subject of much debate since the emergence of the field. In this paper, we contribute new empirical evidence to this argument using a rigorous and principled experimental method applied to six problems common in the GP literature. The approach tunes the algorithm parameters to enable a fair and objective comparison of two different GP algorithms, the first using a combination of crossover and reproduction, and secondly using a combination of mutation and reproduction. We find that crossover does not significantly outperform mutation on most of the problems examined. In addition, we demonstrate that the use of a straightforward Design of Experiments methodology is effective at tuning GP algorithm parameters.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Luke, S., Spector, L.: A comparison of crossover and mutation in genetic programming. In: Genetic Programming 1997: Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference, pp. 240–248. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Luke, S., Spector, L.: A revised comparison of crossover and mutation in genetic programming. In: Genetic Programming 1998: Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference, pp. 208–213. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Angeline, P.J.: Comparing subtree crossover with macromutation. In: Angeline, P.J., McDonnell, J.R., Reynolds, R.G., Eberhart, R. (eds.) EP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1213, pp. 101–112. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Montgomery, D.C.: Design and Analysis of Experiments, 6th edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chichester (2005)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Johnson, D.S.: A theoretician’s guide to the experimental analysis of algorithms. In: Goldwasser, M.H., Johnson, D.S., McGeoch, C.C. (eds.) Data Structures, Near Neighbor Searches, and Methodology: Fifth and Sixth DIMACS Implementation Challenges, pp. 215–250. American Mathematical Society, Providence (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Online Experiment Source Code and Scripts, http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/~drw/papers/eurogp2009/

  7. Koza, J.R.: Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural Selection. MIT Press, Cambridge (1992)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Feldt, R., Nordin, P.: Using factorial experiments to evaluate the effect of genetic programming parameters. In: Poli, R., Banzhaf, W., Langdon, W.B., Miller, J., Nordin, P., Fogarty, T.C. (eds.) EuroGP 2000. LNCS, vol. 1802, pp. 271–282. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Coy, S.P., Golden, B.L., Runger, G.C., Wasil, E.A.: Using experimental design to find effective parameter settings for heuristics. Journal of Heuristics 7(1), 77–97 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. ECJ (2008), http://cs.gmu.edu/~eclab/projects/ecj/

  11. Koza, J.R.: Genetic Programming II: Automatic Discovery of Reusable Programs. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Myers, R.H., Montgomery, D.C.: Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chichester (2005)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Vadde, K.K., Syrotiuk, V.R., Montgomery, D.C.: Optimizing protocol interaction using response surface methodology. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 5(6), 627–639 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Leech, N.L., Onwuegbuzie, A.J.: A call for greater use of nonparametric statistics. Technical report, US Dept. Education, Educational Resources Information Center (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wilcoxon, F.: Individual comparisions by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin 1(6), 80–83 (1945)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Vargha, A., Delaney, H.: A critique and improvement of the CL common language effect size statistics of McGraw and Wong. J. Educational and Behavioral Statistics 25(2), 101–132 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

White, D.R., Poulding, S. (2009). A Rigorous Evaluation of Crossover and Mutation in Genetic Programming. In: Vanneschi, L., Gustafson, S., Moraglio, A., De Falco, I., Ebner, M. (eds) Genetic Programming. EuroGP 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5481. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01181-8_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01181-8_19

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-01180-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-01181-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics