Evolving GP Classifiers for Streaming Data Tasks with Concept Change and Label Budgets: A Benchmarking Study

  • Ali Vahdat
  • Jillian Morgan
  • Andrew R. McIntyre
  • Malcolm I. Heywood
  • Nur Zincir-Heywood


Streaming data classification requires that several additional challenges are addressed that are not typically encountered in offline supervised learning formulations. Specifically, access to data at any training generation is limited to a small subset of the data, and the data itself is potentially generated by a non-stationary process. Moreover, there is a cost to requesting labels, thus a label budget is enforced. Finally, an anytime classification requirement implies that it must be possible to identify a ‘champion’ classifier for predicting labels as the stream progresses. In this work, we propose a general framework for deploying genetic programming (GP) to streaming data classification under these constraints. The framework consists of a sampling policy and an archiving policy that enforce criteria for selecting data to appear in a data subset. Only the exemplars of the data subset are labeled, and it is the content of the data subset that training epochs are performed against. Specific recommendations include support for GP task decomposition/modularity and making additional training epochs per data subset. Both recommendations make significant improvements to the baseline performance of GP under streaming data with label budgets. Benchmarking issues addressed include the identification of datasets and performance measures.


Genetic Programming Data Subset Concept Drift Class Imbalance Streaming Data 
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.



The authors gratefully acknowledge funding provided by the NSERC CRD grant program (Canada).


  1. A. Atwater and M. I. Heywood. Benchmarking Pareto archiving heuristics in the presence of concept drift: Diversity versus age. In ACM Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 885–892, 2013.Google Scholar
  2. A. Atwater, M. I. Heywood, and A. N. Zincir-Heywood. GP under streaming data constraints: A case for Pareto archiving? In ACM Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 703–710, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. K. Bache and M. Lichman. UCI machine learning repository, 2013.Google Scholar
  4. M. Behdad and T. French. Online learning classifiers in dynamic environments with incomplete feedback. In IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pages 1786–1793, 2013.Google Scholar
  5. A. Bifet. Adaptive Stream Mining: Pattern Learning and Mining from Evolving Data Streams, volume 207 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. IOS Press, 2010.Google Scholar
  6. A. Bifet and R. Gavalda. Learning from time-changing data with adaptive windowing. In SIAM International Conference on Data Mining, pages 443–448, 2007.Google Scholar
  7. A. Bifet, I. Z̆liobaitė, B. Pfahringer, and G. Holmes. Pitfalls in benchmarking data stream classification and how to avoid them. In Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, volume 8188 of LNCS, pages 465–479, 2013.Google Scholar
  8. T. Blackwell and J. Branke. Multiswarms, exclusion, and anti-convergence in dynamic environments. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 10(4):459–472, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. G. Brown and L. I. Kuncheva. “Good” and “bad” diversity in majority vote ensembles. In Multiple Classifier Systems, volume 5997 of LNCS, pages 124–133, 2010.Google Scholar
  10. T. Dasu, S. Krishnan, S. Venkatasubramanian, and K. Yi. An information-theoretic approach to detecting changes in multi-dimensional data streams. In Proceedings of the Symposium on the Interface of Statistics, 2006.Google Scholar
  11. A. P. Dawid. Statistical theory: The prequential approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society-A, 147:278–292, 1984.zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. E. D. de Jong. A monotonic archive for pareto-coevolution. Evolutionary Computation, 15(1):61–94, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. I. Dempsey, M. O’Neill, and A. Brabazon. Foundations in Grammatical Evolution for Dynamic Environments, volume 194 of Studies in Computational Intelligence. Springer, 2009.Google Scholar
  14. G. Ditzler and R. Polikar. Hellinger distance based drift detection for non-stationary environments. In IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Dynamic and Uncertain Environments, pages 41–48, 2011.Google Scholar
  15. J. A. Doucette, P. Lichodzijewski, and M. I. Heywood. Hierarchical task decomposition through symbiosis in reinforcement learning. In ACM Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 97–104, 2012a.Google Scholar
  16. J. A. Doucette, A. R. McIntyre, P. Lichodzijewski, and M. I. Heywood. Symbiotic coevolutionary genetic programming: a benchmarking study under large attribute spaces. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 13(1), 2012b.Google Scholar
  17. W. Fan, Y. Huang, H. Wang, and P. S. Yu. Active mining of data streams. In Proceedings of SIAM International Conference on Data Mining, pages 457–461, 2004.Google Scholar
  18. G. Folino and G. Papuzzo. Handling different categories of concept drift in data streams using distributed GP. In European Conference on Genetic Programming, volume 6021 of LNCS, pages 74–85, 2010.Google Scholar
  19. J. Gama. Knowledge discovery from data streams. CRC Press, 2010.Google Scholar
  20. J. Gama. A survey on learning from data streams: Current and future trends. Progress in Artificial Intelligence, 1(1):45–55, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. J. Gama, P. Medas, G. Castillo, and P. P. Rodrigues. Learning with drift detection. In Advances in Artificial Intelligence, volume 3171 of LNCS, pages 66–112, 2004.Google Scholar
  22. J. Gama, R. Sebastião, and P. Rodrigues. On evaluating stream learning algorithms. Machine Learning, 90(3):317–346, 2013.zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. M. Harries. Splice-2 comparative evaluation: Electricity pricing. Technical report, University of New South Wales, 1999.Google Scholar
  24. M. I. Heywood. Evolutionary model building under streaming data for classification tasks: opportunities and challenges. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 2015. DOI  10.1007/s10710-014-9236-y.
  25. S. Huang and Y. Dong. An active learning system for mining time changing data streams. Intelligent Data Analysis, 11(4):401–419, 2007.Google Scholar
  26. N. Kashtan, E. Noor, and U. Alon. Varying environments can speed up evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(34):13713–13716, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. D. Kifer, S. Ben-David, and J. Gehrke. Detecting change in data streams. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pages 180–191. Morgan Kaufmann, 2004.Google Scholar
  28. C. Lanquillon. Information filtering in changing domains. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 41–48, 1999.Google Scholar
  29. P. Lichodzijewski and M. I. Heywood. Managing team-based problem solving with Symbiotic Bid-based Genetic Programming. In ACM Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 363–370, 2008.Google Scholar
  30. P. Lichodzijewski and M. I. Heywood. Symbiosis, complexification and simplicity under GP. In ACM Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 853–860, 2010.Google Scholar
  31. P. Lindstrom, B. MacNamee, and S. J. Delany. Handling concept drift in a text data stream constrained by high labelling cost. In Proceedings of the International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference. AAAI, 2010.Google Scholar
  32. P. Lindstrom, B. MacNamee, and S. J. Delany. Drift detection using uncertainty distribution divergence. Evolutionary Intelligence, 4(1):13–25, 2013.Google Scholar
  33. L. L. Minku, A. P. White, and X. Yao. The impact of diversity on online ensemble learning in the presence of concept drift. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 22(5):730–742, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. M. Parter, N. Kashtan, and U. Alon. Facilitated variation: How evolution learns from past environments to generalize to new environments. PLoS Computational Biology, 4(11):e1000206, 2008.Google Scholar
  35. J. Quinonero-Candela, M. Sugiyama, A. Schwaighofer, and N. D. Lawrence, editors. Dataset shift in machine learning. MIT Press, 2009.Google Scholar
  36. R. Sebastio and J. Gama. Change detection in learning histograms from data streams. In Proceedings of the Portuguese Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 4874 of LNCS, pages 112–123. Springer, 2007.Google Scholar
  37. R. Stapenhurst and G. Brown. Theoretical and empirical analysis of diversity in non-stationary learning. In IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Dynamic and Uncertain Environments, pages 25–32, 2011.Google Scholar
  38. I. Z̆liobaitė, A. Bifet, B. Pfahringer, and G. Holmes. Active learning with evolving streaming data. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, pages 597–612. Springer, 2011.Google Scholar
  39. I. Z̆liobaitė, A. Bifet, B. Pfahringer, and G. Holmes. Active learning with drifting streaming data. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 25(1):27–54, 2014.Google Scholar
  40. A. Vahdat, A. Atwater, A. R. McIntyre, and M. I. Heywood. On the application of GP to streaming data classification tasks with label budgets. In ACM Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference: ECBDL Workshop, pages 1287–1294, 2014.Google Scholar
  41. A. Vahdat, J. Morgan, A. R. McIntyre, M. I. Heywood, and A. N. Zincir-Heywood. Tapped delay lines for GP streaming data classification with label budgets. In European Conference on Genetic Programming, volume 9025 of LNCS. Springer, 2015.Google Scholar
  42. P. Vorburger and A. Bernstein. Entropy-based concept shift detection. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Data Mining, pages 1113–1118, 2006.Google Scholar
  43. G. P. Wagner and L. Altenberg. Complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability. Complexity, 50(3):433–452, 1996.Google Scholar
  44. X. Zhu, P. Zhang, X. Lin, and Y. Shi. Active learning from stream data using optimal weight classifier ensemble. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics – Part B, 40(6):1607–1621, 2010.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ali Vahdat
    • 1
  • Jillian Morgan
    • 1
  • Andrew R. McIntyre
    • 1
  • Malcolm I. Heywood
    • 1
  • Nur Zincir-Heywood
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Computer ScienceDalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada

Personalised recommendations