Learning Comparative User Models for Accelerating Human-Computer Collaborative Search

  • Gregory S. Hornby
  • Josh Bongard
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7247)


Interactive Evolutionary Algorithms (IEAs) are a powerful explorative search technique that utilizes human input to make subjective decisions on potential problem solutions. But humans are slow and get bored and tired easily, limiting the usefulness of IEAs. Here we describe our system which works toward overcoming these problems, The Approximate User (TAU), and also a simulated user as a means to test IEAs. With TAU, as the user interacts with the IEA a model of the user’s preferences is constructed and continually refined and this model is what is used as the fitness function to drive evolutionary search. The resulting system is a step toward our longer term goal of building a human-computer collaborative search system. In comparing the TAU IEA against a basic IEA it is found that TAU is 2.5 times faster and 15 times more reliable at producing near optimal results.


Evolutionary Design Interactive Evolutionary Algorithm 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Barnum, G.J., Mattson, C.A.: A computationally assisted methodology for preference-guided conceptual design. Journal of Mechanical Design 132 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bongard, J., Lipson, H.: Nonlinear system identification using coevolution of models and tests. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 9, 361–384 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bongard, J., Lipson, H.: Automated reverse engineering of nonlinear dynamical systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104, 9943–9948 (2007)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bridle, J.: Probabilistic interpretation of feedforward classification network outputs, with relationships to statistical pattern recognition. In: Fogelman-Soulie, H. (ed.) Neurocomputing: Algorithms, Architectures and Applications. NATA ASI Series. Springer (1990)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caldwell, C., Johnston, V.S.: Tracking a criminal suspect through ’face-space’ with a genetic algorithm. In: Booker, R.K.B.L.B. (ed.) Proc. of the Fourth Intl. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 416–421. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1991)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Campbell, M.I., Rai, R., Kurtoglu, T.: A stochastic graph grammar algorithm for interactive search. In: 14th Design for Manufacturing and the Life Cycle Conference, pp. 829–840. ASME (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clune, J., Lipson, H.: Evolving Three-Dimensional Objects with a Generative Encoding Inspired by Developmental Biology. In: Proc. European Conference on Artificial Life, pp. 144–148. Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cybenko, G.: Approximations by superpositions of a sigmoidal function. Math. Contrl., Signals, Syst. 2, 303–314 (1989)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dawkins, R.: The Blind Watchmaker. Harlow Longman (1986)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schmidt, M., Lipson, H.: Actively probing and modeling users in interactive co-evolution. In: Keijzer, M., et al. (eds.) Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, GECCO-2006, pp. 385–386. ACM Press, Seattle (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Secretan, J., Beato, N., Ambrosio, D.B.D., Rodriguez, A., Campbell, A., Folsom-Kovarik, J.T., Stanley, K.O.: Picbreeder: A case study in collaborative evolutionary exploration of design space. Evolutionary Computation (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sims, K.: Artificial Evolution for Computer Graphics. In: SIGGRAPH 1991 Conference Proceedings. Annual Conference Series, pp. 319–328 (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Takagi, H.: Interactive evolutionary computation: fusion of the capabilities of EC optimization and human evaluation. Proceedings of the IEEE, 1275–1296 (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wannarumon, S., Bohez, E.L.J., Annanon, K.: Aesthetic evolutionary algorithm for fractal-based user-centered jewelry design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 22, 19–39 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregory S. Hornby
    • 1
  • Josh Bongard
    • 2
  1. 1.University of California Santa CruzMoffett FieldUSA
  2. 2.Morphology, Evolution and Cognition Lab., Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations