An Investigation of Geometric Semantic GP with Linear Scaling

Created by W.Langdon from gp-bibliography.bib Revision:1.8612

@InProceedings{nadizar:2023:GECCO2,

• author = "Giorgia Nadizar and Fraser Garrow and Berfin Sakallioglu and Lorenzo Canonne and Sara Silva and Leonardo Vanneschi",
• title = "An Investigation of Geometric Semantic {GP} with Linear Scaling",
• booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2023 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference",
• year = "2023",
• editor = "Sara Silva and Luis Paquete and Leonardo Vanneschi and Nuno Lourenco and Ales Zamuda and Ahmed Kheiri and Arnaud Liefooghe and Bing Xue and Ying Bi and Nelishia Pillay and Irene Moser and Arthur Guijt and Jessica Catarino and Pablo Garcia-Sanchez and Leonardo Trujillo and Carla Silva and Nadarajen Veerapen",
• pages = "1165--1174",
• address = "Lisbon, Portugal",
• series = "GECCO '23",
• month = "15-19 " # jul,
• organisation = "SIGEVO",
• publisher = "Association for Computing Machinery",
• publisher_address = "New York, NY, USA",
• keywords = "genetic algorithms, genetic programming, symbolic regression, linear scaling, geometric semantic genetic programming",
• isbn13 = "9798400701191",
• DOI = "10.1145/3583131.3590418",
• size = "10 pages",
• abstract = "Geometric semantic genetic programming (GSGP) and linear scaling (LS) have both, independently, shown the ability to outperform standard genetic programming (GP) for symbolic regression. GSGP uses geometric semantic genetic operators, different from the standard ones, without altering the fitness, while LS modifies the fitness without altering the genetic operators. So far, these two methods have already been joined together in only one practical application. However, to the best of our knowledge, a methodological study on the pros and cons of integrating these two methods has never been performed. In this paper, we present a study of GSGP-LS, a system that integrates GSGP and LS. The results, obtained on five hand-tailored benchmarks and six real-life problems, indicate that GSGP-LS outperforms GSGP in the majority of the cases, confirming the expected benefit of this integration. However, for some particularly hard datasets, GSGP-LS overfits training data, being outperformed by GSGP on unseen data. Additional experiments using standard GP, with and without LS, confirm this trend also when standard crossover and mutation are employed. This contradicts the idea that LS is always beneficial for GP, warning the practitioners about its risk of overfitting in some specific cases.",
• notes = "GECCO-2023 A Recombination of the 32nd International Conference on Genetic Algorithms (ICGA) and the 28th Annual Genetic Programming Conference (GP)",

}

Genetic Programming entries for Giorgia Nadizar Fraser Garrow Berfin Sakallioglu Lorenzo Canonne Sara Silva Leonardo Vanneschi

Citations