skip to main content
10.1145/3377930.3390180acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

DAE-GP: denoising autoencoder LSTM networks as probabilistic models in estimation of distribution genetic programming

Published:26 June 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Estimation of distribution genetic programming (EDA-GP) algorithms are metaheuristics where sampling new solutions from a learned probabilistic model replaces the standard mutation and recombination operators of genetic programming (GP). This paper presents DAE-GP, a new EDA-GP which uses denoising autoencoder long short-term memory networks (DAE-LSTMs) as probabilistic model. DAE-LSTMs are artificial neural networks that first learn the properties of a parent population by mapping promising candidate solutions to a latent space and reconstructing the candidate solutions from the latent space. The trained model is then used to sample new offspring solutions. We show on a generalization of the royal tree problem that DAE-GP outperforms standard GP and that performance differences increase with higher problem complexity. Furthermore, DAE-GP is able to create offspring with higher fitness from a learned model in comparison to standard GP. We believe that the key reason for the high performance of DAE-GP is that we do not impose any assumptions about the relationships between learned variables which is different to previous EDA-GP models. Instead, DAE-GP flexibly identifies and models relevant dependencies of promising candidate solutions.

References

  1. Yoshua Bengio, Li Yao, Guillaume Alain, and Pascal Vincent. 2013. Generalized Denoising Auto-Encoders as Generative Models. Advances on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS'13) 26 (2013), 899--907.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander W. Churchill, Siddharth Sigtia, and Chrisantha Fernando. 2014. A denoising autoencoder that guides stochastic search. Technical Report. arXiv:1404.1614Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Matej Črepinšek, Shih-Hsi Liu, and Marjan Mernik. 2013. Exploration and Exploitation in Evolutionary Algorithms: A Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 45, 3 (2013), 33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Jason M Daida, Hsiaolei Li, Ricky Tang, and Adam M Hilss. 2003. What Makes a Problem GP-Hard? Validating a Hypothesis of Structural Causes. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO'03). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1665--1677.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Félix Antoine Fortin, François Michel De Rainville, Marc André Gardner, Marc Parizeau, and Christian Gagńe. 2012. DEAP: Evolutionary algorithms made easy. Journal of Machine Learning Research 13, 1 (2012), 2171--2175.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Felix A Gers, Jürgen Schmidhuber, and Fred Cummins. 2000. Learning to forget: Continual prediction with LSTM. Neural Computation 12, 10 (2000), 2451--2471.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Yoshihiko Hasegawa and Hitoshi Iba. 2006. Estimation of Bayesian network for program generation. In Proceedings of the Third Asian-Pacific workshop on Genetic Programming. Hanoi, Vietnam, 35--46.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Yoshihiko Hasegawa and Hitoshi Iba. 2008. A Bayesian Network Approach to Program Generation. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 12, 6 (2008), 750--764. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Erik Hemberg, Kalyan Veeramachaneni, James McDermott, Constantin Berzan, and Una-May O'Reilly. 2012. An investigation of local patterns for estimation of distribution genetic programming. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO '12). ACM, Philadelphia, USA, 767--774. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Long Short-Term Memory. Neural Computation 9, 8 (1997), 1735--1780. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. John H. Holland. 1975. Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: An introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Terry Jones and Stephanie Forrest. 1995. Fitness Distance Correlation as a Measure of Problem Difficulty for Genetic Algorithms. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Genetic Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA, USA, 184--192. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Kangil Kim, Yin Shan, Xuan Hoai Nguyen, and R. I. McKay. 2014. Probabilistic model building in genetic programming: a critical review. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 15, 2 (2014), 115--167. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. 2015. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR'15). San Diego, CA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. John R. Koza. 1992. Genetic Programming: On the programming of computers by means of natural selection. MIT press, Cambridge, London.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Joseph B. Kruskal. 1983. An Overview of Sequence Comparison: Time Warps, String Edits, and Macromolecules. Society of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) Review 25, 2 (1983), 201--237. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Sean Luke. 2000. Two fast tree-creation algorithms for genetic programming. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 4, 3 (2000), 274--283. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Graham Neubig, Chris Dyer, Yoav Goldberg, Austin Matthews, Waleed Ammar, Antonios Anastasopoulos, Miguel Ballesteros, David Chiang, Daniel Clothiaux, Trevor Cohn, Kevin Duh, Manaal Faruqui, Cynthia Gan, Dan Garrette, Yangfeng Ji, Lingpeng Kong, Adhiguna Kuncoro, Gaurav Kumar, Chaitanya Malaviya, Paul Michel, Yusuke Oda, Matthew Richardson, Naomi Saphra, Swabha Swayamdipta, and Pengcheng Yin. 2017. DyNet: The Dynamic Neural Network Toolkit. Technical Report. arXiv:CoRR abs/1701.03980Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Christopher Olah. 2015. Understanding LSTM Networks. (2015). http://colah.github.io/posts/2015-08-Understanding-LSTMs/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Martin Pelikan, Mark W Hauschild, and Fernando G Lobo. 2012. Introduction to estimation of distribution algorithms. Missouri Estimation of Distribution Algorithms Laboratory (MEDAL), Report Nr. 2012003 (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Riccardo Poli and Nicholas Freitag McPhee. 2008. A Linear Estimation-of-Distribution GP system. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Genetic Programming (EuroGP'08). Springer, Neapel, Italy, 206--217.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Malte Probst. 2015. Denoising Autoencoders for fast Combinatorial Black Box Optimization. Technical Report. (2015). arXiv:1503.01954Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Bill Punch, Doug Zongker, and Erik Goodman. 1996. The Royal Tree Problem, a Benchmark for Single and Multi-population Genetic Programming. In Advances in Genetic Programming II, Peter J. Angeline and Kenneth E. Kinnear Jr. (Eds.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 299--316.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. A Ratle and M Sebag. 2001. Avoiding the bloat with probabilistic grammar-based genetic programming. In 5th International Conference on Artificial Evolution (EA'01). Springer, Le Creusot, France, 255--266.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Franz Rothlauf. 2011. Design of Modern Heuristics: Principles and Application (1st ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Rafal Salustowicz and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Probabilistic incremental program evolution. Evolutionary Computation 5, 2 (1997), 123--141. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Yin Shan, Robert McKay, Daryl Essam, and Hussein Abbass. 2006. A survey of probabilistic model building genetic programming. In Scalable Optimization via Probabilistic Modeling, M Pelikan, K Sastry, and E CantúPaz (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 121--160.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Dominik Sobania and Franz Rothlauf. 2020. Challenges of Program Synthesis with Grammatical Evolution. In Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Genetic Programming (EuroGP'20). Springer, Sevilla, Spain (forthcoming).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Léo Françoso Dal Piccol Sotto and Vinícius Veloso de Melo. 2017. A Probabilistic Linear Genetic Programming with Stochastic Context-Free Grammar for solving Symbolic Regression problems. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO'17). ACM, Berlin, Germany, 1017--1024.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Nitish Srivastava, Elman Mansimov, and Ruslan Salakhutdinov. 2015. Unsupervised learning of video representations using LSTMs. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML'15). ACM, Lille, France, 843--852. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. D. Thierens. 1999. Scalability problems of simple genetic algorithms. Evolutionary computation 7, 4 (1999), 331--352. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention Is All You Need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) 30 (2017), 5998--6008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Pascal Vincent, Hugo Larochelle, Yoshua Bengio, and Pierre Antoine Manzagol. 2008. Extracting and composing robust features with denoising autoencoders. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML'08). ACM, Helsinki, Finland, 1096--1103. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Paul J. Werbos. 1988. Generalization of backpropagation with application to a recurrent gas market model. Neural Networks 1, 4 (1988), 339--356. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Pak-Kan Wong, Leung-Yau Lo, Man-Leung Wong, and Kwong-Sak Leung. 2014. Grammar-Based Genetic Programming with Bayesian Network. In IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC'14). IEEE, Beijing, China, 739--746.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Pak-Kan Wong, Leung-Yau Lo, Man-Leung Wong, and Kwong-Sak Leung. 2014. Grammar-Based Genetic Programming with Dependence Learning and Bayesian Network Classifier. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO'14). ACM, Vancouver, Canada, 959--966. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. K Yanai and H Iba. 2003. Estimation of distribution programming based on Bayesian network. In IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC '03). IEEE, Canberra, Australia, 1618--1625. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. DAE-GP: denoising autoencoder LSTM networks as probabilistic models in estimation of distribution genetic programming

      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