Advertisement

Effects of Using Two Neighborhood Structures in Cellular Genetic Algorithms for Function Optimization

  • Hisao Ishibuchi
  • Tsutomu Doi
  • Yusuke Nojima
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4193)

Abstract

We implement a cellular genetic algorithm with two neighborhood structures following the concept of structured demes: One is for interaction among individuals and the other is for mating. The effect of using these two neighborhood structures on the search ability of cellular genetic algorithms is examined through computational experiments on function optimization problems. Experimental results show that good results are obtained from the combination of a small interaction neighborhood and a large mating neighborhood. This relation in the size of the two neighborhood structures coincides with many cases of biological evolution in nature such as plants and territorial animals. It is also shown that the search ability of cellular genetic algorithms is deteriorated by the opposite combination of the two neighborhood structures.

Keywords

Neighborhood Structure Interaction Neighborhood Search Ability Parallel Genetic Algorithm Elite Individual 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alba, E., Dorronsoro, B.: The Exploration/Exploitation Tradeoff in Dynamic Cellular Genetic Algorithms. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 9, 126–142 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alba, E., Tomassini, M.: Parallelism and Evolutionary Algorithms. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 6, 443–462 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cantu-Paz, E.: Efficient and Accurate Parallel Genetic Algorithms. Springer, Berlin (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Charlesworth, B.: A Note on the Evolution of Altruism in Structured Demes. The American Naturalist 113, 601–605 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Giacobini, M., Tomassini, M., Tettamanzi, A.G.B., Alba, E.: Selection Intensity in Cellular Evolutionary Algorithms for Regular Lattices. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 9, 489–505 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gorges-Schleuter, M.: ASPARAGOS: An Asynchronous Parallel Genetic Optimization Strategy. In: Proc. of 3rd International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 422–427 (1989)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gorges-Schleuter, M.: A Comparative Study on Global and Local Selection in Evolutionary Strategies. In: Eiben, A.E., Bäck, T., Schoenauer, M., Schwefel, H.-P. (eds.) PPSN 1998. LNCS, vol. 1498, pp. 367–377. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ifti, M., Killingback, T., Doebelic, M.: Effects of Neighborhood Size and Connectivity on the Spatial Continuous Prisoner’s Dilemma. Journal of Theoretical Biology 231, 97–106 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ishibuchi, H., Namikawa, N.: Evolution of Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma Game Strategies in Structured Demes under Random Pairing in Game Playing. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 9, 552–561 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ishibuchi, H., Namikawa, N.: Evolution of Cooperative Behavior in the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma under Random Pairing in Game Playing. In: Proc. of 2005 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 2637–2644 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ishibuchi, H., Namikawa, N., Ohara, K.: Effects of Spatial Structures on Evolution of Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma Game Strategies in Single-Dimensional and Two-Dimensional Grids. In: Proc. of 2006 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (in press, 2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Manderick, B., Spiessens, P.: Fine-Grained Parallel Genetic Algorithms. In: Proc. of 3rd International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 428–433 (1989)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sarma, J., De Jong, K.: An Analysis of the Effects of Neighborhood Size and Shape on Local Selection Algorithms. In: Ebeling, W., Rechenberg, I., Voigt, H.-M., Schwefel, H.-P. (eds.) PPSN 1996. LNCS, vol. 1141, pp. 236–244. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sarma, J., De Jong, K.: An Analysis of Local Selection Algorithms in a Spatially Structured Evolutionary Algorithm. In: Proc. of 7th International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 181–186 (1997)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Slatkin, M., Wilson, D.S.: Coevolution in Structured Demes. Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences, 76, 2084–2087 (1979)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spiessens, P., Manderick, B.: A Massively Parallel Genetic Algorithm: Implementation and First Analysis. In: Proc. of 4th International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 279–286 (1991)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Whitley, D.: Cellular Genetic Algorithms. In: Proc. of 5th International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, p. 658 (1993)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wilson, D.S.: Structured Demes and the Evolution of Group-Advantageous Traits. The American Naturalist 111, 157–185 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wilson, D.S.: Structured Demes and Trait-Group Variation. The American Naturalist 113, 606–610 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hisao Ishibuchi
    • 1
  • Tsutomu Doi
    • 1
  • Yusuke Nojima
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Intelligent Systems, Graduate School of EngineeringOsaka Prefecture UniversityOsakaJapan

Personalised recommendations