Immediate transfer of global improvements to all individuals in a population compared to automatically defined functions for the EVEN-5,6-PARITY problems
Koza has shown how automatically defined functions (ADFs) can reduce computational effort in the GP paradigm. In Koza’s ADF, as well as in standard GP, an improvement in a part of a program (an ADF or a main body) can only be transferred via crossover. In this article, we consider whether it is a good idea to transfer immediately improvements found by a single individual to the whole population. A system that implements this idea has been proposed and tested for the EVEN-5-PARITY and EVEN-6-PARITY problems. Results are very encouraging: computational effort is reduced (compared to Koza’s ADFs) and the system seems to be less prone to early stagnation. Finally, our work suggests further research where less extreme approaches to our idea could be tested.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Manu Ahluwalia, Larry Bell, and Terence C. Fogarty. Co-evolving functions in genetic programming: A comparison in ADF selection strategies. In John R. Koza, Kalyanmoy Deb, Marco Dorigo, David B. Fogel, Max Garzon, Hitoshi Iba, and Rick L. Riolo, editors, Genetic Programming 1997: Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference, pages 3–8, Stanford University, CA, USA, 13–16 July 1997. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- 2.Ricardo Aler, Daniel Borrajo, and Pedro Isasi. Evolving heuristics for planning. In Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Conference on Evolutionary Programming, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, San Diego, CA, March 1998. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- 3.W. Daniel Hillis. Co-evolving parasites improve simulated evolution as an optimization procedure. In Christopher G. Langton, Charles Taylor, J. Doyne Farmer, and Steen Rasmussen, editors, Artificial Life II, volume X of Sante Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity, pages 313–324. Addison-Wesley, Santa Fe Institute, New Mexico, USA, February 1990 1992.Google Scholar
- 4.J.R. Koza. Genetic Programming II. The MIT Press, 1994.Google Scholar