Developmental Evaluation in Genetic Programming: The Preliminary Results
This paper investigates developmental evaluation in Genetic Programming (GP). Extant GP systems, including developmental GP systems, typically exhibit modular and hierarchical structure only to the degree it is built-in by the designer; by contrast, biological systems exhibit a high degree of organization in their genotypes. We hypothesise that even when GP systems are subject to changing environments, for which the adaptability arising from modular structure would be advantageous, the benefit is at the species rather than individual level, so that selection is very weak. By contrast, biological systems are selected repeatedly throughout their development process. We suggest that this difference is crucial; that if an individual is evaluated multiple times throughout its development, then modular structure can provide an adaptive advantage to that individual, and hence can be selected for by evolution. We investigate this hypothesis using Tree Adjoining Grammar Guided Genetic Programming (TAG3P) , which has good properties for supporting evaluation during incremental development. Our preliminary results show that developmental TAG3P outperforms both original TAG3P and standard tree-based GP on an appropriate problem, in ways which suggest that modular solutions may have been developed.
KeywordsGenetic Programming Modular Structure Developmental Evaluation Derivation Tree Terminal Symbol
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Angeline, P.J.: Evolutionary Algorithms and Emergent Intelligence, PhD thesis, Computer Science Department, Ohio State University (1994)Google Scholar
- 5.Rosca, J.P., Ballard, D.H.: Hierarchical Self- Organization in Genetic Programming. In: Rouveirol, C., Sebag, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1994)Google Scholar
- 7.Miller, J.F., Thomson, P.: A Developmental Method for Growing Graphs and Circuits. In: Tyrrell, A.M., Haddow, P.C., Torresen, J. (eds.) 4th International Conference on Evolvable Systems: From Biology to Hardware. LNCS, vol. 2210, pp. 93–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
- 9.Hoai, N.X., McKay, R.I., Essam, D.L., Chau, R.: Solving the Symbolic Regression Problem with Tree Adjunct Grammar Guided Genetic Programming: The Comparative Results. In: Yao, X. (ed.) Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2002), vol. 2, pp. 1326–1331. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2002)Google Scholar
- 10.Hornby, G.S.: Measuring, Enabling and Comparing Modularity, Regularity and Hierarchy in Evolutionary Design. In: Beyer, H.-G., O’Reilly, M., Arnold, D.V., Banzhaf, W., Blum, C., Bonabeau, E.W., Cantu-Paz, E., Dasgupta, D., Deb, K., Foster, J.A., de Jong, E., Lipson, H., Llora, X., Mancoridis, S., Pelikan, M., Raidl, G.R., Soule, T., Tyrrell, A.M., Watson, J.-P., Zitzler, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2005 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO 2005), 2nd edn., pp. 1729–1736. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar