Advertisement

Strongly Biased Crossover Operator for Subgraph Selection in Edge-Set Based Graph Representation

  • Sakshi Arora
  • M. L. Garg
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 259)

Abstract

The performance of crossover operator is a complex interplay of the various characteristics of the genetic algorithm (GA) and sometimes also of the problem under question. The fundamental design choices in a GA therefore, are its representation of candidate solutions and the operators that will act on that representation. This paper suggests a new strongly biased multiparent crossover operator that offers a strong locality and provides a strong heritability quotient but can still escape the local optima when the sample space is over represented by similar building blocks. The proposed operator uses a dynamic 2-D vector representation for the chromosomes and this data structure may evolve as the execution of the crossover operator proceeds. On a population which consists of solutions near to optimal and mostly lying in the basin of attraction of single optima, the bias towards the optima in the generated offsprings is proportional to the sample size from the search space. Based on this reasoning, the effect of arity of the proposed crossover operator is tested using a population in which all the candidates lie in close neighborhood of each other. To analyze the dynamic search behavior of the proposed crossover operator and the impact of the representation scheme on the locality, heritability and exploratory power of the operator, we suggest a no mutation, zero selection pressure GA model that generates bounded diameter minimum spanning trees from the underlying complete graphs on random and Euclidean instances.

Keywords

Genetic algorithm Arity of operator Locality Heritability 

References

  1. 1.
    Raidl, G.R., Julstrom, B.A.: Edge sets: an effective evolutionary coding of spanning trees. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 7(3), 225–239 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fekete, S.P., et al.: A network-flow technique for finding low-weight bounded-degree spanning trees. J. Algorithms 24.2, 310–324 (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Julstrom, B.A., Raidl, G.R.: A permutation-coded evolutionary algorithm for the bounded-diameter minimum spanning tree problem. In: Workshop on Analysis and Design of Representations in 2003 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference’s Workshops Proceedings, pp. 2–7 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gen, M., Ida, K., Kim, J.: A spanning tree-based genetic algorithm for bicriteria topological network design. In: Evolutionary Computation Proceedings, 1998. The 1998 IEEE International Conference on IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, pp. 15–20. IEEE (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rothlauf, F.: On the bias and performance of the edge-set encoding. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 13(3), 486–499 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rothlauf, F., Tzschoppe, C.: Making the edge-set encoding fly by controlling the bias of its crossover operator, pp. 202–212. Springer, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tsutsui, S.: Sampling bias and search space boundary extension in real coded genetic algorithms. In GECCO, pp. 211–218 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Srinivas, M., Patnaik, L.M.: Adaptive probabilities of crossover and mutation in genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 24(4), 656–667 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Julstrom, B.A.: Encoding rectilinear Steiner trees as lists of edges. In: Proceedings of the 2001 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing ACM, pp. 356–360 (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li, Y.: An effective implementation of a direct spanning tree representation in GAs. In: Applications of Evolutionary Computing, pp. 11–19. Springer, Berlin (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Julstrom, B.A., Raidl, G.R.: Weight-biased edge-crossover in evolutionary algorithms for two graph problems. In: Proceedings of the 2001 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 321–326 (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaufman, H.: An experimental investigation of process identification by competitive evolution. IEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cybernet. 3(1), 11–16 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mühlenbein, H.: Parallel genetic algorithms, population genetics and combinatorial optimization. In: Parallelism, Learning, Evolution, pp. 398–406. Springer, Berlin (1991)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bersini, H., Seront, G.: In search of a good crossover between evolution and optimization. Manner Manderick 1503, 479–488 (1992)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aizawa, A.N.: Evolving SSE: a stochastic schemata exploiter. In: Proceedings of the 1st IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 525–529. IEEE Press (1994)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eiben, A.E., Raue, P.E., Ruttkay, Z.: Genetic algorithms with multi-parent recombination. In: Parallel Problem Solving from Nature—PPSN III, pp. 78–87. Springer, Berlin (1994)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tsutsui, S.: Multi-parent recombination in genetic algorithms with search space boundary extension by mirroring. In: Parallel Problem Solving from Nature—PPSN V. Springer, Berlin (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Knowles, J., Corne, D.: A new evolutionary approach to the degree-constrained minimum spanning tree problem. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 4(2), 125–134 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Deo, N., Abdalla, A.: Computing a diameter-constrained minimum spanning tree in parallel. In: Algorithms and Complexity, pp. 17–31. Springer, Berlin (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Arora, S., Garg, M.L.: New hybrid evolutionary algorithm for solving the bounded diameter minimum spanning tree problem (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Arora, S., Garg, M.L.: Clustering the data points to obtain optimum backbones for the bounded diameter minimum spanning trees. In: 2011 International Conference on Communication Systems and Network Technologies (CSNT), pp. 303–307. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Arora, S., Garg, M.L.: Neighborhood search for the bounded diameter minimum spanning tree. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv. Eng. 3(2) (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kopinitsch, B.: An ant colony optimisation algorithm for the bounded diameter minimum spanning tree problem. Vienna University of Technology, Institute of Computer Graphics and Algorithms (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gruber, M., Raidl, G.R.: Variable neighborhood search for the bounded diameter minimum spanning tree problem. PhD thesis, Institute of Computer Graphics and Algorithms, Vienna University of Technology, pp. 1187–1194 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer Science and EngineeringS.M.V.D.UKatraIndia

Personalised recommendations