Journal of Heuristics

, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 311–334 | Cite as

Migration Policies, Selection Pressure, and Parallel Evolutionary Algorithms

  • Erick Cantú-Paz
Article

Abstract

This paper investigates how the policy used to select migrants and the individuals they replace affects the selection pressure in parallel evolutionary algorithms (EAs) with multiple populations. The four possible combinations of random and fitness-based emigration and replacement of existing individuals are considered. The investigation follows two approaches. The first is to calculate the takeover time under the four migration policies. This approach makes several simplifying assumptions, but the qualitative conclusions that are derived from the calculations are confirmed by the second approach. The second approach consists on quantifying the increase in the selection intensity. The selection intensity is a domain-independent adimensional quantity that can be used to compare the selection pressure of common selection methods with the pressure caused by migration. The results may help to avoid excessively high (or low) selection pressures that may cause the search to fail, and offer a plausible explanation to the frequent claims of superlinear speedups in parallel EAs.

multiple populations multiple demes island model migration rate emigrants immigrants 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bäck, T. (1994). “Selective Pressure in Evolutionary Algorithms: A Characterization of Selection Mechanisms.” Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 1. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press, pp. 57–62.Google Scholar
  2. Bäck, T. (1995). “Generalized Convergence Models for Tournament-and (µ,λ)-Selection.” In (Eschelman, 1995), pp. 2–8.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, J.E. (1985). “Adaptive Selection Methods for Genetic Algorithms.” In J.J. Grefenstette (ed.), Proceedings of an International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 101–111.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, J.E. (1987). “Reducing Bias and Ineffiency in the Selection Algorithm.” In (Grefenstette, 1987), pp. 14–21.Google Scholar
  5. Baluja, S. (1994). “Population-Based Incremental Learning:AMethod for Integrating Genetic Search Based Function Optimization and Competitive Learning.” Tech. Rep. No. CMU-CS-94-163, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  6. Belding, T.C. (1995). “The Distributed Genetic Algorithm Revisited.” In (Eschelman, 1995), pp. 114–121.Google Scholar
  7. Blickle, T. and L. Thiele. (1996). “A Comparison of Selection Schemes used in Evolutionary Algorithms.” Evolutionary Computation 4(4), 361–394.Google Scholar
  8. Booker, L.B. (1982). “Intelligent Behavior as an Adaptation to the Task Environment.” Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Michigan. (University Microfilm No. 8214966).Google Scholar
  9. Brindle, A. (1981). “Genetic Algorithms for Function Optimization.” Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.Google Scholar
  10. Burrows, P. (1972). “Expected Selection Differentials for Directional Selection.” Biometrics 23, 1091–1100.Google Scholar
  11. Cantú-Paz, E. (1999). “Migration Policies and Takeover Times in Parallel Genetic Algorithms.” In W. Banzhaf, J. Daida, A.E. Eiben, M.H. Garzon, V. Honavar, M. Jakiela, and R.E. Smith (eds.), GECCO-99: Proceedings of the 1999 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, p. 775.Google Scholar
  12. Cantú-Paz, E. and D.E. Goldberg. (2000). “Parallel Genetic Algorithms: Theory and Practice.” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 186, 221–238.Google Scholar
  13. Eschelman, L. (ed.). (1995). Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  14. Goldberg, D.E. and K. Deb. (1991). “A Comparative Analysis of Selection Schemes used in Genetic Algorithms.” Foundations of Genetic Algorithms. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann 1, 69–93. (Also TCGA Report 90007).Google Scholar
  15. Goldberg, D.E., K. Deb, and D. Thierens. (1993). “Toward a Better Understanding of Mixing in Genetic Algorithms.” Journal of the Society of Instrument and Control Engineers 32(1), 10–16.Google Scholar
  16. Grefenstette, J.J. (1981). “Parallel Adaptive Algorithms for Function Optimization.” Tech. Rep. No. CS-81-19, Vanderbilt University, Computer Science Department, Nashville, TN.Google Scholar
  17. Grefenstette, J.J. (ed.). (1987). Proceeding of the Second International Conference on Genetic Algorithms. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  18. Grosso, P.B. (1985). “Computer Simulations of Genetic Adaptation: Parallel Subcomponent Interaction in a Multilocus Model.” Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Michigan. (University Microfilms No. 8520908).Google Scholar
  19. Hancock, P.J.B. (1997). “Selection: A Comparison of Selection Mechanisms.” In T. Bäck, D.B. Fogel, and Z. Michalewicz (eds.), Handbook of Evolutionary Computation. Bristol and New York: Institute of Physics Publishing and Oxford University Press, pp. C2.8:1–C2.8:11.Google Scholar
  20. Harik, G.R., F.G. Lobo, and D.E. Goldberg. (1998). “The Compact Genetic Algorithm.” In I. of Electrical IEEE Press, Proceedings of 1998 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation. Piscataway, NJ, pp. 523–528.Google Scholar
  21. Harter, H.L. (1970). Order Statistics and Their Use in Testing and Estimation.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  22. Holland, J.H. (1975). Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lin, S.-C., E.D. Goodman, and W.F. Punch III. (1997). “Investigating Parallel Genetic Algorithms on Job Shop Scheduling Problems.” In P.J. Angeline, R.G. Reynolds, J.R. McDonnell, and R. Eberhart (eds.), Evolutionary Programming VI. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 383–393.Google Scholar
  24. Miller, B.L. and D.E. Goldberg. (1995). “Genetic Algorithms, Tournament Selection, and the Effects of Noise.” Complex Systems 9(3), 193–212.Google Scholar
  25. Miller, B.L. and D.E. Goldberg. (1996). “Genetic Algorithms, Selection Schemes, and the Varying Effects of Noise.” Evolutionary Computation 4(2), 113–131.Google Scholar
  26. Mühlenbein, H. (1991). “Evolution in Time and Space—The Parallel Genetic Algorithm.” In G.J.E. Rawlins (ed.), Foundations of Genetic Algorithms. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 316–337.Google Scholar
  27. Mühlenbein, H. and G. Paaβ. (1996). “From Recombination of Genes to the Estimation of Distributions I. Binary Parameters.” In (Voigt et al., 1996), pp. 178–187.Google Scholar
  28. Mühlenbein, H. and D. Schlierkamp-Voosen. (1993). “Predictive Models for the Breeder Genetic Algorithm: I. Continuous Parameter Optimization.” Evolutionary Computation 1(1), 25–49.Google Scholar
  29. Punch, W.F. (1998). “How Effective are Multiple Programs in Genetic Programming.” In J.R. Koza, W. Banzhaf, K. Chellapilla, K. Deb, M. Dorigo, D.B. Fogel, M.H. Garzon, D.E. Goldberg, H. Iba, and R.L. Riolo (eds.), Genetic Programming 98. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 308–313.Google Scholar
  30. Sarma, J. and K. De Jong. (1996). “An Analysis of the Effects of Neighborhood Size and Shape on Local Selection Algorithms.” In (Voigt et al., 1996), pp. 236–244.Google Scholar
  31. Sarma, J. and K. De Jong. (1997). “An Analysis of Local Selection Algorithms in a Spatially Structured Evolutionary Algorithm.” In T. Bäck (ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Genetic Algorithms. San Francisco, Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 181–187.Google Scholar
  32. Schaffer, J.D. (ed.). (1989). Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Genetic Algorithms. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  33. Schwefel, H. (1981). Numerical Optimization of Computer Models. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  34. Syswerda, G. (1989). “Uniform Crossover in Genetic Algorithms.” In (Schaffer, 1989), pp. 2–9.Google Scholar
  35. Tanese, R. (1987). “Parallel Genetic Algorithm for a Hypercube.” In (Grefenstette, 1987), pp. 177–183.Google Scholar
  36. Tanese, R. (1989). “Distributed Genetic Algorithms.” In (Schaffer, 1989), pp. 434–439.Google Scholar
  37. Thierens, D. and D.E. Goldberg. (1993). “Mixing in Genetic Algorithms.” In S. Forrest (ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 38–45.Google Scholar
  38. Thierens, D. and D.E. Goldberg. (1994). “Convergence Models of Genetic Algorithm Selection Schemes.” In Y. Davidor, H.-P. Schwefel, and R. Männer (eds.), Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, PPSN III. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 119–129.Google Scholar
  39. Voigt, H.-M., W. Ebeling, I. Rechenberg, and H.-P. Schwefel (eds.). (1996). Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, PPSN IV. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  40. Whitley, D. (1993). “An Executable Model of a Simple Genetic Algorithm.” In L.D. Whitley (ed.), Foundations of Genetic Algorithms 2. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 45–62.Google Scholar
  41. Whitley, D., S. Rana, and R.B. Heckendorn. (1999). “Exploiting Separability in Search: The Island Model Genetic Algorithm.” Journal of Computing and Information Technology 7(1), 33–47.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erick Cantú-Paz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Illinois Genetic Algorithms LaboratoryUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations