Skip to main content
Book cover

Search Methodologies pp 93–117Cite as

Genetic Algorithms

Abstract

Genetic algorithms (GAs) are search methods based on principles of natural selection and genetics (Fraser 1957; Bremermann 1958; Holland 1975). We start with a brief introduction of simple GAs and the associated terminologies. GAs encode the decision variables of a search problem into finite-length strings of alphabets of certain cardinality. The strings which are candidate solutions to the search problem are referred to as chromosomes, the alphabets are referred to as genes and the values of genes are called alleles. For example, in a problem such as the traveling salesman problem (TSP), a chromosome represents a route, and a gene may represent a city. In contrast to traditional optimization techniques, GAs work with coding of parameters, rather than the parameters themselves.

Keywords

  • Genetic Algorithm
  • Travel Salesman Problem
  • Travel Salesman Problem
  • Memetic Algorithm
  • Search Problem

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4614-6940-7_4
  • Chapter length: 25 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-1-4614-6940-7
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Fig. 4.1
Fig. 4.2
Fig. 4.3
Fig. 4.4
Fig. 4.5

References

  • Albert LA (2001) Efficient genetic algorithms using discretization scheduling. Master’s thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (also IlliGAL report no 2002005)

    Google Scholar 

  • Asoh H, Mühlenbein H (1994) On the mean convergence time of evolutionary algorithms without selection and mutation. PPSN 3, pp 98–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Bäck T (1994) Selective pressure in evolutionary algorithms: a characterization of selection mechanisms. In: Proceedings of the 1st IEEE conference on evolutionary computation, Orlando, pp 57–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Bäck T (1995) Generalized convergence models for tournament—and (μ, λ)—selection. In: Proceedings of 6th international conference on genetic algorithms, Pittsburgh, pp 2–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Bäck T (1996) Evolutionary algorithms in theory and practice. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Baluja S (1994) Population-based incremental learning: a method of integrating genetic search based function optimization and competitive learning. Technical report CMU-CS-94-163, Carnegie Mellon University

    Google Scholar 

  • Barthelemy J-FM, Haftka RT (1993) Approximation concepts for optimum structural design—a review. Struct Optim 5:129–144

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Booker LB, Fogel DB, Whitley D, Angeline PJ (1997) Recombination. In: Bäck T, Fogel DB, Michalewicz Z (eds) The handbook of evolutionary computation, chap E3.3. IOP Publishing/Oxford University Press, London/Oxford, pp C3.3:1–C3.3:27

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosman PAN, Thierens D (1999) Linkage information processing in distribution estimation algorithms. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, Orlando, pp 60–67 (also Technical report no UU-CS-1999-10)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bremermann HJ (1958) The evolution of intelligence. The nervous system as a model of its environment. Technical report no 1, Department of Mathematics, University of Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulmer MG (1985) The mathematical theory of quantitative genetics. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke EK, Newell JP (1999) A multi-stage evolutionary algorithm for the timetabling problem. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3:63–74

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Burke EK, Smith AJ (1999) A memetic algorithm to schedule planned maintenance for the national grid. ACM J Exp Algor 4. doi:10.1145/347792.347801

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke EK, Smith AJ (2000) Hybrid evolutionary techniques for the maintenance scheduling problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst 15:122–128

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Burke EK, Elliman DG, Weare RF (1995) Specialised recombinative operators for timetabling problems. In: Fogarty T (ed) Evolutionary computing AISB workshop 1995. LNCS 993. Springer, Berlin, pp 75–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke EK, Newall JP, Weare RF (1996) A memetic algorithm for university exam timetabling. In: Burke EK, Ross P (eds) The practice and theory of automated timetabling I. LNCS 1153. Springer, Berlin, pp 241–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke EK, Newall JP, Weare RF (1998) Initialisation strategies and diversity in evolutionary timetabling. Evol Comput J 6:81–103

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Burke EK, Cowling PI, De Causmaecker P, Vanden Berghe G (2001) A mimetic approach to the nurse rostering problem. Appl Intell 15:199–214

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cantú-Paz E (1999) Migration policies and takeover times in parallel genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, Orlando, p 775 (also IlliGAL report no 99008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantú-Paz E (2000) Efficient and accurate parallel genetic algorithms. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen J-H (2004) Theory and applications of efficient multi-objective evolutionary algorithms. Doctoral dissertation, Feng Chia University, Taiwan

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng RW, Gen M (1997) Parallel machine scheduling problems using memetic algorithms. Comput Indust Eng 33:761–764

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Costa D (1995) An evolutionary tabu search algorithm and the NHL scheduling problem. INFOR 33:161–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis L (1985) Applying algorithms to epistatic domains. In: Proceedings of the international joint conference on artifical intelligence, Los Angeles, pp 162–164

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jong KA (1975) An analysis of the behavior of a class of genetic adaptive systems. Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan (University microfilm no 76-9381)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis JE, Torczon V (1997) Managing approximation models in optimization. In: Alexandrov NM, Hussaini MY (eds) Multidisciplinary design optimization: state-of-the-art. SIAM, Philadelphia, pp 330–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick JM, Grefenstette JJ, Van Gucht D (1984) Image registration by genetic search. In: Proceedings of the IEEE southeast conference. IEEE Press, Piscataway, Louisville, KY, pp 460–464

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleurent C, Ferland J (1993) Genetic hybrids for the quadratic assignment problem. DIMACS series in mathematics and theoretical computer science. This DIMACS workshop on Quadratic Assignment and Related Problems was held at DIMACS 16:173–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser AS (1957) Simulation of genetic systems by automatic digital computers. II. Effects of linkage on rates under selection. Aust J Biol Sci 10:492–499

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE (1983) Computer-aided pipeline operation using genetic algorithms and rule learning. Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE (1987) Simple genetic algorithms and the minimal deceptive problem. In: Davis L (ed) Genetic algorithms and simulated annealing, chap 6. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, pp 74–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search optimization and machine learning. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE (1999a) The race, the hurdle, and the sweet spot: lessons from genetic algorithms for the automation of design innovation and creativity. In: Bentley P (ed) Evolutionary design by computers, chap 4. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, pp 105–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE (1999b) Using time efficiently: genetic-evolutionary algorithms and the continuation problem. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, Orlando, pp 212–219 (also IlliGAL report no 99002)

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE (2002) Design of innovation: lessons from and for competent genetic algorithms. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Deb K (1991) A comparitive analysis of selection schemes used in genetic algorithms. Foundations of genetic algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, pp 69–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Lingle R (1984) Alleles, loci, and the TSP. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on genetic algorithms, Pittsburgh, pp 154–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Sastry K (2001) A practical schema theorem for genetic algorithm design and tuning. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, San Francisco, pp 328–335 (also IlliGAL report no 2001017)

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Segrest P (1987) Finite Markov chain analysis of genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on genetic algorithms, Cambridge, MA, USA, pp 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Voessner S (1999) Optimizing global-local search hybrids. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, Orlando, pp 220–228 (also IlliGAL report no 99001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Korb B, Deb K (1989) Messy genetic algorithms: motivation, analysis, and first results. Complex Syst 3:493–530 (also IlliGAL report no 89003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Deb K, Clark JH (1992) Genetic algorithms, noise, and the sizing of populations. Complex Syst 6:333–362 (also IlliGAL report no 91010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Deb K, Kargupta H, Harik G (1993a) Rapid, accurate optimization of difficult problems using fast messy genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the international conference on genetic algorithms, Urbana, pp 56–64 (also IlliGAL report no 93004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Thierens D, Deb K (1993b) Toward a better understanding of mixing in genetic algorithms. J Soc Instrum Contr Eng 32:10–16 (also IlliGAL report no 92009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Sastry K, Latoza T (2001) On the supply of building blocks. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, San Francisco, pp 336–342 (also IlliGAL report no 2001015)

    Google Scholar 

  • Grefenstette JJ, Fitzpatrick JM (1985) Genetic search with approximate function evaluations. In: Proceedings of the international conference on genetic algorithms and their applications, Pittsburgh, pp 112–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Harik G (1999) Linkage learning via probabilistic modeling in the ECGA (IlliGAL report no 99010). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

    Google Scholar 

  • Harik G, Goldberg DE (1997) Learning linkage. Foundations of genetic algorithms 4, pp 247–262 (also IlliGAL report no 96006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Harik G, Lobo F, Goldberg DE (1998) The compact genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on evolutionary computation, Piscataway, pp 523–528 (also IlliGAL report no 97006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Harik G, Cantú-Paz E, Goldberg DE, Miller BL (1999) The gambler’s ruin problem, genetic algorithms, and the sizing of populations. Evol Comput 7:231–253 (also IlliGAL report no 96004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart WE, Belew RK (1996) Optimization with genetic algorithm hybrids using local search. In: Belew RK, Mitchell M (eds) Adaptive individuals in evolving populations. Addison-Wesley, Reading, pp 483–494

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckendorn RB, Wright AH (2004) Efficient linkage discovery by limited probing. Evol Comput 12:517–545

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JH (1975) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibaraki T (1997) Combinations with other optimixation problems. In: Bäck T, Fogel DB, Michalewicz Z (eds) Handbook of evolutionary computation. Institute of Physics Publishing and Oxford University Press, Bristol/New York, pp D3:1–D3:2

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin Y (2005) A comprehensive survey of fitness approximation in evolutionary computation. Soft Comput J 9:3–12

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kargupta H (1996) The gene expression messy genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the international conference on evolutionary computation, Nagoya, pp 814–819

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasnogor N, Smith JE (2005) A tutorial for competent memetic algorithms: models,taxonomy and design issues. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 9:474–488

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Krasnogor N, Hart W, Smith JE (eds) (2004) Recent advances in memetic algorithms. Studies in fuzziness and soft computing, vol 166. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis SJ, McDonnell J (2004) Learning with case injected genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 8:316–328

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Miller BL, Goldberg DE (1995) Genetic algorithms, tournament selection, and the effects of noise. Complex Syst 9:193–212 (also IlliGAL report no 95006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller BL, Goldberg DE (1996a) Genetic algorithms, selection schemes, and the varying effects of noise. Evol Comput 4:113–131 (also IlliGAL report no 95009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller BL, Goldberg DE (1996b) Optimal sampling for genetic algorithms. Intelligent engineering systems through artificial neural networks, ASME Press, New York 6:291–297

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscato P (1989) On evolution, search, optimization, genetic algorithms and martial arts: towards memetic algorithms. Technical report C3P 826, California Institute of Technology

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscato P (1999) Part 4: Memetic algorithms. In: Corne D, Dorigo M, Glover F (eds) New ideas in optimization. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 217–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscato P, Cotta C (2003) A gentle introduction to memetic algorithms. In: Glover F, Kochenberger G (eds) Handbook of metaheuristics, chap 5. Kluwer, Norwell

    Google Scholar 

  • Mühlenbein H, Paass G (1996) From recombination of genes to the estimation of distributions I. Binary parameters. PPSN 4, pp 178–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Mühlenbein H, Schlierkamp-Voosen D (1993) Predictive models for the breeder genetic algorithm: I. Continous parameter optimization. Evol Comput 1:25–49

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Munetomo M, Goldberg DE (1999) Linkage identification by non-monotonicity detection for overlapping functions. Evol Comput 7:377–398

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver JM, Smith DJ, Holland JRC (1987) A study of permutation crossover operators on the travelling salesman problem. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on genetic algorithms, Cambridge, pp 224–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Paechter B, Cumming A, Luchian H (1995) The use of local search suggestion lists for improving the solution of timetable problems with evolutionary algorithms. In: Fogarty T (ed) Evolutionary computing: AISB workshop 1995. LNCS 993. Springer, Berlin, pp 86–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Paechter B, Cumming A, Norman MG, Luchian H (1996) Extensions to a memetic timetabling system. In: Burke EK, Ross P (eds) The practice and theory of automated timetabling I. LNCS 1153. Springer, Berlin, pp 251–265

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelikan M (2005) Hierarchical Bayesian optimization algorithm: toward a new generation of evolutionary algorithm. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelikan M, Sastry K (2004) Fitness inheritance in the Bayesian optimization algorithm. In: Proceedings of the GECCO 2, Seattle, pp 48–59 (also IlliGAL report no 2004009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelikan M, Goldberg DE, Cantú-Paz E (2000) Linkage learning, estimation distribution, and Bayesian networks. Evol Comput 8:314–341 (also IlliGAL report no 98013)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelikan M, Sastry K, Cantú-Paz E (eds) (2006) Scalable optimization via probabilistic modeling: algorithms to applications. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph G (2000) Takeover times and probabilities of non-generational selection rules. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, Las Vegas, pp 903–910

    Google Scholar 

  • Sakamoto Y, Goldberg DE (1997) Takeover time in a noisy environment. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on genetic algorithms, East Lansing, pp 160–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Sastry K (2001) Evaluation-relaxation schemes for genetic and evolutionary algorithms. Master’s thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (also IlliGAL report no 2002004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sastry K, Goldberg DE (2003) Scalability of selectorecombinative genetic algorithms for problems with tight linkage. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, Chicago, pp 1332–1344 (also IlliGAL report no 2002013)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sastry K, Goldberg DE (2004) Let’s get ready to rumble: crossover versus mutation head to head. In: Proceedings of the GECCO 2, Seattle, pp 126–137 (also IlliGAL report no 2004005)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sastry K, Goldberg DE, Pelikan M (2001) Don’t evaluate, inherit. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, San Francisco, pp 551–558 (also IlliGAL report no 2001013)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sastry K, Pelikan M, Goldberg DE (2004) Efficiency enhancement of genetic algorithms building-block-wise fitness estimation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international congress on evolutionary computation. Portland, OR, USA, pp 720–727

    Google Scholar 

  • Sastry K, Goldberg DE, Llorà X (2007) Towards billion bit optimization via efficient estimation of distribution algorithms. In: Proceedings of the GECCO, London, pp 577–584 (also IlliGAL report no 2007007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinha A (2003) Designing efficient genetic and evolutionary hybrids. Master’s thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (also IlliGAL report no 2003020)

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith R, Dike B, Stegmann S (1995) Fitness inheritance in genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the ACM symposium on applied computing. ACM, New York, pp 345–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Spears WM, De Jong KA (1994) On the virtues of parameterized uniform crossover. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on genetic algorithms, San Diego, pp 230–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Syswerda G (1989) Uniform crossover in genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on genetic algorithms, San Mateo, pp 2–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Thierens D (1999) Scalability problems of simple genetic algorithms. Evol Comput 7:331–352

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Thierens D, Goldberg DE (1994) Convergence models of genetic algorithm selection schemes. PPSN 3, Springer, Berlin/New York, pp 116–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Thierens D, Goldberg DE, Pereira AG (1998) Domino convergence, drift, and the temporal-salience structure of problems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international congress on evolutionary computation, pp 535–540

    Google Scholar 

  • Valenzuala J, Smith AE (2002) A seeded memetic algorithm for large unit commitment problems. J Heuristics 8:173–196

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Watson JP, Rana S, Whitely LD, Howe AE (1999) The impact of approximate evaluation on the performance of search algorithms for warehouse scheduling. J Scheduling 2:79–98

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley D (1995) Modeling hybrid genetic algorithms. In: Winter G, Périaux J, Galán M, Cuesta P (eds) Genetic algorithms in engineering and computer science. Wiley, Chichester, pp 191–201

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu T-L (2006) A matrix approach for finding extrema: problems with modularity, hierarchy, and overlap. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (also IlliGAL report no 2007012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Kumara Sastry

    Present address: University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Inc. and University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL, USA

    David E. Goldberg (ThreeJoy Associates)

  2. Automated Scheduling, Optimization and Planning Research Group, School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

    Graham Kendall

  3. Automated Scheduling, Optimization and Planning Research Group, School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Semenyih, Malaysia

    Graham Kendall

Authors
  1. Kumara Sastry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David E. Goldberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Graham Kendall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Graham Kendall .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Computing Science and Mathematics, University of Stirling, Scotland, United Kingdom

    Edmund K. Burke

  2. Research and Knowledge Transfer, University of Nottingham, Malaysia & UK, Semenyih, Malaysia

    Graham Kendall

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sastry, K., Goldberg, D.E., Kendall, G. (2014). Genetic Algorithms. In: Burke, E., Kendall, G. (eds) Search Methodologies. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6940-7_4

Download citation