Advertisement

Basic, Dual, Adaptive, and Directed Mutation Operators in the Fly Algorithm

  • Zainab Ali Abbood
  • Franck P. Vidal
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10764)

Abstract

Our work is based on a Cooperative Co-evolution Algorithm – the Fly algorithm – in which individuals correspond to 3-D points. The Fly algorithm uses two levels of fitness function: (i) a local fitness computed to evaluate a given individual (usually during the selection process) and (ii) a global fitness to assess the performance of the population as a whole. This global fitness is the metrics that is minimised (or maximised depending on the problem) by the optimiser. Here the solution of the optimisation problem corresponds to a set of individuals instead of a single individual (the best individual) as in classical evolutionary algorithms (EAs). The Fly algorithm heavily relies on mutation operators and a new blood operator to insure diversity in the population. To lead to accurate results, a large mutation variance is often initially used to avoid local minima (or maxima). It is then progressively reduced to refine the results. Another approach is the use of adaptive operators. However, very little research on adaptive operators in Fly algorithm has been conducted. We address this deficiency and propose 4 different fully adaptive mutation operators in the Fly algorithm: Basic Mutation, Adaptive Mutation Variance, Dual Mutation, and Directed Mutation. Due to the complex nature of the search space, (kN-dimensions, with k the number of genes per individuals and N the number of individuals in the population), we favour operators with a low maintenance cost in terms of computations. Their impact on the algorithm efficiency is analysed and validated on positron emission tomography (PET) reconstruction.

Keywords

Evolutionary algorithms Parisian approach Reconstruction algorithms Positron emission tomography Mutation operator 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work has been funded by FP7-PEOPLE-2012-CIG project Fly4PET (http://fly4pet.fpvidal.net). We thank HPC Wales for the use of its services.

References

  1. 1.
    Ali Abbood, Z., Lavauzelle, J., Lutton, E., Rocchisani, J.M., Louchet, J., Vidal, F.P.: Voxelisation in the 3D Fly algorithm for PET. Swarm Evol. Comput. (2017) (in press)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bäck, T.: Self-adaptation in genetic algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Artificial Life, pp. 263–271. MIT Press (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beyer, H.G., Schwefel, H.P.: Evolution strategies - a comprehensive introduction. Nat. Comput. 1(1), 3–52 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bousquet, A., Louchet, J., Rocchisani, J.-M.: Fully three-dimensional tomographic evolutionary reconstruction in nuclear medicine. In: Monmarché, N., Talbi, E.-G., Collet, P., Schoenauer, M., Lutton, E. (eds.) EA 2007. LNCS, vol. 4926, pp. 231–242. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79305-2_20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chellapilla, K.: Combining mutation operators in evolutionary programming. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 2(3), 91–96 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clark, K., et al.: The cancer imaging archive (TCIA): maintaining and operating a public information repository. J. Digit. Imaging 26(6), 1045–1057 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Collet, P., Louchet, J.: Artificial evolution and the Parisian approach. Applications in the processing of signals and images, chap. 2, pp. 15–44. Wiley (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Collet, P., Lutton, E., Louchet, J.: Issues on the optimisation of evolutionary algorithm code. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eiben, A.E., Hinterding, R., Michalewicz, Z.: Parameter control in evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 3(2), 124–141 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hansen, N., Müller, S.D., Koumoutsakos, P.: Reducing the time complexity of the derandomized evolution strategy with covariance matrix adaptation (CMA-ES). Evol. Comput. 11(1), 1–18 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hudson, H.M., Larkin, R.S.: Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 13(4), 601–609 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Louchet, J.: Stereo analysis using individual evolution strategy. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition, vol. 1, pp. 908–911 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lutton, E., Lévy Véhel, J.: Pointwise regularity of fitness landscapes and the performance of a simple ES. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 16–21 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ochoa, G.: Setting the mutation rate: scope and limitations of the 1/L heuristic. In: Proceedings of the GECCO 2002, pp. 495–502 (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Orlowska-Kowalska, T., Lis, J.: Application of evolutionary algorithms with adaptive mutation to the identification of induction motor parameters at standstill. COMPEL 28(6), 1647–1661 (2009)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rechenberg, I.: Evolutionsstrategie: Optimierung technischer Systeme nach Prinzipien der biologischen Evolution. Frommann-Holzboog Verlag, Stuttgart (1973)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schwefel, H.P.: Numerical Optimization of Computer Models. Wiley, Chichester (1981)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shepp, L.A., Vardi, Y.: Maximum likelihood reconstruction for emission tomography. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 1(2), 113–122 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vidal, F.P., Lutton, E., Louchet, J., Rocchisani, J.-M.: Threshold selection, mitosis and dual mutation in cooperative co-evolution: application to medical 3D tomography. In: Schaefer, R., Cotta, C., Kołodziej, J., Rudolph, G. (eds.) PPSN 2010. LNCS, vol. 6238, pp. 414–423. Springer, Heidelberg (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15844-5_42 Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vidal, F.P., Villard, P., Lutton, E.: Tuning of patient specific deformable models using an adaptive evolutionary optimization strategy. IEEE Trans. Bio-Med. Eng. 59(10), 2942–2949 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceBangor UniversityBangorUK

Personalised recommendations