Advertisement

The grid-to-neighbourhood relationship in cellular GAs: from design to solving complex problems

  • Zakaria Abdelmoiz DahiEmail author
  • Enrique Alba
Methodologies and Application
  • 27 Downloads

Abstract

Cellular genetic algorithms (cGAs) are a class of evolutionary algorithms in which the population is structured as a grid and interactions between individuals are restricted to the neighbourhood. Like any other optimisation algorithm, the cGA’s efficiency lies in its ability to find an adequate balance between its exploratory and exploitive capabilities. The search selection pressure represents a good indicator of the state of that balance. From that point of view, it has been shown that the cGA’s grid-to-neighbourhood relationship can be used to reflect this property. Until today, not much has been done in that area of research and many questions still surround this grid-to-neighbourhood effect. This paper describes a systematic study on the effects of that ratio on the efficiency of the cGA. This is done by proposing a dynamic cGA that adapts its ratio through evolving its grid structure using some strategy. The study is conducted using a wide range of dynamic and static ratio-control policies and, for the first time, by considering both synchronous and asynchronous cGAs. As a validation problem, we have opted for a real-world complex problem in advanced cellular networks: the users’ mobility management. A wide set of differently sized and realistic instances of this problem have been used, and several comparisons have been conducted against other top-ranked solvers. The experiments showed that the ratio strategy rules the cGA’s convergence, efficiency and scalability. Its effectiveness is correlated with the ratio-adaptation policy and the replacement synchronism being used. Indeed, our proposals that are based on deterministic and dynamic strategies with an asynchronous replacement were able to outperform most of the state-of-the-art algorithms.

Keywords

Cellular genetic algorithms Adaptation Cellular networks Mobility management 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors would like to thank Mr. Louay Rabah Dahi for his help in checking the numerical results. Also, author B acknowledges partial funding from Spanish-plus-FEDER and MINECO project moveON TIN2014-57341-R, TIN2016-81766-REDT and TIN2017-88213-R. Author A declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. (2008) Mobility management problem benchmark instances. http://oplink.lcc.uma.es/problems/mmp.html
  2. Al-Naqi A, Erdogan AT, Arslan T, Mathieu Y (2010) Balancing exploration and exploitation in an adaptive three-dimensional cellular genetic algorithm via a probabilistic selection operator. In: Proceedings of the NASA/ESA conference on adaptive hardware and systems. pp 258–264Google Scholar
  3. Al-Naqi A, Erdogan AT, Arslan T (2011) Fault tolerant three-dimensional cellular genetic algorithms with adaptive migration schemes. In: Proceedings of the NASA/ESA conference on adaptive hardware and systems. pp 352–359Google Scholar
  4. Alba E, Dorronsoro B (2005) The exploration/exploitation tradeoff in dynamic cellular genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 9:126–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alba E, Dorronsoro B (2008) Cellular genetic algorithms, 1st edn. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Alba E, Troya JM (2000) Cellular evolutionary algorithms: evaluating the influence of ratio. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on parallel problem solving from nature, (PPSN VI). Springer, pp 29–38Google Scholar
  7. Almeida-Luz SM, Vega-Rodriguez MA, Gomez-Pulido JA, Sanchez-Perez JM (2011) Differential evolution for solving the mobile location management. Appl Soft Comput 11(1):410–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bäck T (1993) Optimal mutation rates in genetic search. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on genetic algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, pp 2–8Google Scholar
  9. Banharnsakun A (2019) Artificial bee colony algorithm for solving the knight’s tour problem. In: Vasant P, Zelinka I, Weber GW (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent computing and optimization (ICO 2018). Springer International Publishing, pp 129–138Google Scholar
  10. Bar-Noy A, Kessler I (1993) Tracking mobile users in wireless communications networks. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 39(6):1877–1886zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Berrocal-Plaza V, Vega-Rodriguez MA, Sanchez-Perez JM (2014) A strength pareto approach to solve the reporting cells planning problem. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on computational science and its applications, (ICCSA). Springer, vol 8584, pp 212–223Google Scholar
  12. Dahi ZA (2017) Optimisation problem solving in the field of cellular networks. PhD thesis, Constantine 2 UniversityGoogle Scholar
  13. Dahi ZA, Mezioud C, Alba E (2016) A novel adaptive genetic algorithm for mobility management in cellular networks. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on hybrid artificial intelligent systems, (HAIS). Springer, pp 225–237Google Scholar
  14. Dahi ZA, Alba E, Draa A (2018) A stop-and-start adaptive cellular genetic algorithm for mobility management of GSM-LTE cellular network users. Expert Syst Appl 106:290–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Oliveira Barros M, Dias-Neto AC (2011) Threats to validity in search-based software engineering empirical studies, pp 1–12. UNIROGoogle Scholar
  16. Dorronsoro B, Bouvry P (2011) Adaptive neighborhoods for cellular genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium on parallel and distributed processing workshops and Phd forum. pp 388–394Google Scholar
  17. Eiben AE, Smith JE (2015) Parameters and parameter tuning. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 119–129Google Scholar
  18. Fahad AM, Ahmed AA, Kahar MNM (2019) Network intrusion detection framework based on whale swarm algorithm and artificial neural network in cloud computing. In: Vasant P, Zelinka I, Weber GW (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent computing and optimization (ICO 2018). Springer International Publishing, pp 56–65Google Scholar
  19. González-Álvarez DL, Rubio-Largo A, Vega-Rodríguez MA, Almeida-Luz SM, Gómez-Pulido JA, Sánchez-Pérez JM (2012) Solving the reporting cells problem by using a parallel team of evolutionary algorithms. Logic J IGPL 20(4):722–731MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grefenstette JJ (1986) Optimization of control parameters for genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 16(1):122–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hać A, Zhou X (1997) Locating strategies for personal communication networks, a novel tracking strategy. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 15(8):1425–1436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Huang A, Li D, Hou J, Bi T (2015) An adaptive cellular genetic algorithm based on selection strategy for test sheet generation. Int J Hybrid Inf Technol 8:33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jie L, Liu W, Sun Z, Teng S (2017) Hybrid fuzzy clustering methods based on improved self-adaptive cellular genetic algorithm and optimal-selection-based fuzzy c-means. Neurocomputing 249:140–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kamkar I, Akbarzadeh TM (2010) Multiobjective cellular genetic algorithm with adaptive fuzzy fitness granulation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. pp 4147–4153Google Scholar
  25. Karafotias G, Hoogendoorn M, Eiben AE (2015) Parameter control in evolutionary algorithms: trends and challenges. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 19(2):167–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lechuga GP, Sánchez FM (2019) Modeling and optimization of flexible manufacturing systems: A stochastic approach. In: Vasant P, Zelinka I, Weber GW (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent computing and optimization (ICO 2018). Springer International Publishing, pp 539–546Google Scholar
  27. Lin L, Gen M (2009) Auto-tuning strategy for evolutionary algorithms: balancing between exploration and exploitation. Soft Comput 13(2):157–168zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Malhotra R, Khanna M (2018) Threats to validity in search-based predictive modelling for software engineering. IET Softw 12(4):293–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Morales-Reyes A, Stefatos EF, Erdogan AT, Arslan T (2008) Towards fault-tolerant systems based on adaptive cellular genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the NASA/ESA conference on adaptive hardware and systems. pp 398–405Google Scholar
  30. Pang J, He J, Dong H (2018) Hybrid evolutionary programming using adaptive lévy mutation and modified nelder-mead method. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3422-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Razavi S (2011) Tracking area planning in cellular networks. PhD thesis, Department of Science and Technology, Linkoping UniversityGoogle Scholar
  32. Sarma J, De Jong K (1996) An analysis of the effects of neighborhood size and shape on local selection algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on parallel problem solving from nature parallel problem solving from nature, (PPSN IV). Springer, pp 236–244Google Scholar
  33. Sarma J, Jong KAD (1997) An analysis of local selection algorithms in a spatially structured evolutionary algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on genetic algorithms. pp 181–187Google Scholar
  34. Schraudolph NN, Belew RK (1992) Dynamic parameter encoding for genetic algorithms. Mach Learn 9(1):9–21Google Scholar
  35. Sivanandam SN, Deepa SN (2007) Introduction to genetic algorithms, 1st edn. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Sun CT, Wu MD (1995) Self-adaptive genetic algorithm learning in game playing. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on evolutionary computation. vol 2, pp 814–818Google Scholar
  37. Talbi EG (2009) Metaheuristics: from design to implementation. Wiley Publishing, HobokenzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tian M, Gao X (2019) Differential evolution with neighborhood-based adaptive evolution mechanism for numerical optimization. Inf Sci 478:422–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Torres-Escobar R, Marmolejo-Saucedo JA, Litvinchev I, Vasant P (2019) Monkey algorithm for packing circles with binary variables. In: Vasant P, Zelinka I, Weber GW (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent computing and optimization (ICO 2018). Springer International Publishing, pp 547–559Google Scholar
  40. Zhang J, Chen WN, Zhan ZH, Yu WJ, Li YL, Chen N, Zhou Q (2012) A survey on algorithm adaptation in evolutionary computation. Front Electr Electron Eng 7(1):16–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zhang L, Tian JH, Jiang J, Liu YJ, Pu MY, Yue T (2018) Empirical research in software engineering-a literature survey. J Comput Sci Technol 33(5):876CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MISC Laboratory, Dep. Fundamental Computer Sciences and their ApplicationsConstantine 2 UniversityConstantineAlgeria
  2. 2.NEO Laboratory, Dep. de Lenguajes y Ciencias de la ComputaciónUniversity of MálagaMálagaSpain

Personalised recommendations