GP for Object Classification: Brood Size in Brood Recombination Crossover
The brood size plays an important role in the brood recombination crossover method in genetic programming. However, there has not been any thorough investigation on the brood size and the methods for setting this size have not been effectively examined. This paper investigates a number of new developments of brood size in the brood recombination crossover method in GP. We first investigate the effect of different fixed brood sizes, then construct three dynamic models for setting the brood size. These developments are examined and compared with the standard crossover operator on three object classification problems of increasing difficulty. The results suggest that the brood recombination methods with all the new developments outperforms the standard crossover operator for all the problems. As the brood size increases, the system effective performance can be improved. When it exceeds a certain point, however, the effective performance will not be improved and the system will become less efficient. Investigation of three dynamic models for the brood size reveals that a good variable brood size which is dynamically set with the number of generations can further improve the system performance over the fixed brood sizes.
KeywordsGenetic Programming Object Detection Brood Size Crossover Operation Program Size
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Howard, D., Roberts, S.C., Ryan, C.: The boru data crawler for object detection tasks in machine vision. In: Applications of Evolutionary Computing, Proceedings of EvoWorkshops 2002, Kinsale, Ireland, pp. 220–230. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
- 4.Poli, R.: Genetic programming for image analysis. In: Koza, J.R., Goldberg, D.E., Fogel, D.B., Riolo, R.L. (eds.) Genetic Programming 1996: Proceedings of the First Annual Conference, Stanford University, CA, USA, pp. 363–368. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
- 5.Holland, J.H.: Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MIT Press, Cambridge (1975)Google Scholar
- 11.Loveard, T., Ciesielski, V.: Representing classification problems in genetic programming. In: Proceedings of the Congress on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 2, pp. 1070–1077. IEEE Press, Seoul, Korea (2001)Google Scholar
- 13.Tackett, W.A.: Genetic programming for feature discovery and image discrimination. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 303–309. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1993)Google Scholar
- 14.Winkeler, J.F., Manjunath, B.S.: Genetic programming for object detection. In: Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference, pp. 330–335. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1997)Google Scholar
- 15.Zhang, M., Ciesielski, V.: Genetic programming for multiple class object detection. In: Proceedings of the 12th Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Sydney, Australia, pp. 180–192. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
- 16.Zhang, M., Andreae, P., Pritchard, M.: Pixel statistics and false alarm area in genetic programming for object detection. In: Raidl, G.R., Cagnoni, S., Cardalda, J.J.R., Corne, D.W., Gottlieb, J., Guillot, A., Hart, E., Johnson, C.G., Marchiori, E., Meyer, J.-A., Middendorf, M. (eds.) EvoIASP 2003, EvoWorkshops 2003, EvoSTIM 2003, EvoROB/EvoRobot 2003, EvoCOP 2003, EvoBIO 2003, and EvoMUSART 2003. LNCS, vol. 2611, pp. 455–466. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Tackett, W.A.: Recombination, Selection and the Genetic Construction of Computer Programs. PhD thesis, University of Souithern California, Department of Electrical Engineering Systems (1994)Google Scholar
- 20.Signal & Image Processing Institute of University of Southern California (accessed on July 22, 2004) Webpage: http://sipi.usc.edu/services/database/database.cgi?volume=textures