Skip to main content
Log in

An Evaluation of EvolutionaryGeneralisation in Genetic Programming

  • Published:
Artificial Intelligence Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Generalisation is one of the most important performance evaluationcriteria for artificial learning systems. An increasing amount ofresearch has recently concentrated on the robustness or generalisationability of the programs evolved using Genetic Programming (GP). Whilesome of these researchers report on the brittleness of the solutionsevolved, some others propose methods of promotingrobustness/generalisation. In this paper, a review of research ongeneralisation in GP and problems with brittleness of solutions producedby GP is presented. Also, a brief overview of several new methodspromoting robustness/generalisation of the solutions produced by GP arepresented.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bersano-Begey, T. F. & Daida, J. M. (1997). A Discussion on Generality and Robustness and a Framework for Fitness Set Construction in Genetic Programming to Promote Robustness. In Koza, J. R. (ed.) Late Breaking Papers at the 1997 Genetic Programming Conference, 11–18. Stanford University, CA, USA: Stanford Bookstore, 13-16 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahlman, S. E. (1988). An Empirical Study of Learning Speed in Back-Propagation Networks. Technical Report CMU-CS-88-162, Carnegie-Mellon, Computer Science Department.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francone, F. D., Nordin, P. & Banzhaf, W. (1996). Benchmarking the Generalization Capabilities of a Compiling Genetic Programming System Using Sparse Data Sets. In Koza, J. R., Goldberg, D. E., Fogel, D. B. & Riolo, R. L. (eds.) Genetic Programming 1996: Proceedings of the First Annual Conference, 72–80. Stanford University, CA, USA: MIT Press, July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gathercole, C. & Ross, P. (1994). Dynamic Training Subset Selections for Supervised Learning in Genetic Programming. In Davidor, Y., Schwefel, H-P. & Männer, R. (eds.) Parallel Problem Solving from Nature III, 312–321. Jerusalem: Springer-Verlag, 9-14 October.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gathercole, C. & Ross, P. (1997). Tackling the Boolean Even N Parity Problem with Genetic Programming and Limited-Error Fitness. In Koza, J. R., Deb, K., Dorigo, M., Fogel, D. B., Garzon, M., Iba, H. & Riolo, R. L. (eds.) Genetic Programming 1997: Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference, 119–127. Stanford University, CA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann, 13-16 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, D. (1989). Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning. Massachusettes: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, T. D. & Wainwright, R. L. (1995). A Simulation of Adaptive Agents in Hostile Environment. In George, K. M., Carroll, J. H., Deaton, E., Oppenheim, D. & Hightower, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1995 ACM Synposium on Applied Computing, 318–323. Nashville, USA: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hondo, N., Iba, H. & Kakazu, Y. (1996). COAST: An Approach to Robustness and Reusability in Genetic Programming. In Koza, J. R., Goldberg, D. E., Fogel, D. B. & Riolo, R. L. (eds.) Genetic Programming 1996: Proceedings of the First Annual Conference, 429. Stanford University, CA, USA: MIT Press, 28-31 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper, D. & Flann, N. S. (1996). Improving the Accuracy and Robustness of Genetic Programming Through Expression Simplification. In Koza, J. R., Goldberg, D. E., Fogel, D. B. & Riolo, R. L. (eds.) Genetic Programming 1996: Proceedings of the First Annual Conference, 428. Stanford University, CA, USA: MIT Press, 28-31 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iba, H. (1999). Bagging, Boosting, and Bloating in Genetic Programming. In Banzhaf, W., Daida, J., Eiben, A. E., Garzon, M. H., Honavar, V., Jakiela, M. & Smith R. E. (eds.) Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, Vol. 2, 1053–1060. Orlando, Florida, USA: Morgan Kaufmann, 13-17 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, T., Iba, H. & Kimura, M. (1996). Robustness of Robot Programs Generated by Genetic Programming. In Koza, J. R., Goldberg, D. E., Fogel, D. B. & Riolo, R. L. (eds.) Genetic Programming 1996: Proceedings of the First Annual Conference, 321–326. Stanford University, CA, USA: MIT Press, 28-31 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jefferson, D. et al. (1991). Evolution as a Theme in Artificial Life: The Genesys/tracker System. In Artificial Life II. Addison-Wesley.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Koza, J. (1994). Genetic Programming II. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuscu, I. (1996). Evolution of Learning Rules for Hard Learning Problems. In Fogel, L. J., Angeline, P. J. & Baeck, T. (eds.) Evolutionary Programming V: Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Conference on Evolutionary Programming. MIT Press.

  • Kuscu, I. (1998a). Evolving a Generalised Behavior: Artificial Ant Problem Revisited. In Porto, V. W. (ed.) Seventh Annual Conference on Evolutionary Programming. Mission Valley, San Diego, CA, USA: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuscu, I. (1998b). Promoting Generalization of Learned Behaviours in Genetic Programming. In Eiben, A. E. (ed.) International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, 27-30. Amsterdam.

  • Kuscu, I. (1999a). Evolutionary Generalisation and Genetic Programming. PhD thesis, The University of Sussex.

  • Kuscu, I. (1999b). A Genetic Constructive Induction Model. In Angeline, P. J., Michalewicz, Z., Schoenauer, M., Yao, X. & Zalzala, A. (eds.) International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, 212-217. IEEE Press.

  • Kuscu, I. (2000). Generalisation and Domain Specific Functions in Genetic Programming. In Zalzala, A., Fonseca, C., Kim, J-H. & Smith, A. (eds.) International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, 1393-1400. IEEE Press.

  • Moore, F. W. & Garcia, O. N. (1997). New Methodology for Reducing Brittleness in Genetic Programming. In Pohl, E. (ed.) Proceedings of the National Aerospace and Electronics 1997 Conference (NAECON-97). IEEE Press.

  • Nordin, P. & Banzhaf, W. (1995). Genetic Programming Controlling a Miniature Robot. In Siegel, E. V. & Koza, J. R. (eds.) Working Notes for the AAAI Symposium on Genetic Programming, 61–67. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT, 10-12 November, AAAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, C. (1994). An Evolved, Vision-Based Behavioral Model of Obstacle Avoidance Behaviour. In Langton, C. G. (ed.) Artificial Life III, Vol. XVII of SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity, 327–346. Santa Fe Institute, New Mexico, USA: Addison-Wesley, 15-19 June 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronge, A. & Mats, G. (1996). Genetic Programs and Co-Evolution Developing Robust General Purpose Controllers Using Local Mating in Two Dimensional Populations. In Voigt, H-M., Ebeling, W., Rechenberg, I. & Schwefel, H-P. (eds.) Parallel Problem Solving from Nature IV, Proceedings of the International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 1141 of LNCS, 81–90. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag, 22-26 September.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosca, J. (1996). Generality versus Size in Genetic Programming. In Koza, J. R., Goldberg, D. E., Fogel, D. B. & Riolo, R. L. (eds.) Genetic Programming 1996: Proceedings of the First Annual Conference, 381–387. Stanford University, CA, USA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thrun, S. B., Bala, J., Bloendorn, E., Bratko, I. et al. (1991). The Monk's Problems - A Performance Comparison of Different Learning Algorithms. Technical Report CMU-CS-91-197, School of Computer Science, Carnegie-Mellon University, USA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kushchu, I. An Evaluation of EvolutionaryGeneralisation in Genetic Programming. Artificial Intelligence Review 18, 3–14 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016379201230

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016379201230

Navigation