Graph representations in genetic programming

IF 1.7 3区 计算机科学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Françoso Dal Piccol Sotto, Léo, Kaufmann, Paul, Atkinson, Timothy, Kalkreuth, Roman, Porto Basgalupp, Márcio
{"title":"Graph representations in genetic programming","authors":"Françoso Dal Piccol Sotto, Léo, Kaufmann, Paul, Atkinson, Timothy, Kalkreuth, Roman, Porto Basgalupp, Márcio","doi":"10.1007/s10710-021-09413-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Graph representations promise several desirable properties for genetic programming (GP); multiple-output programs, natural representations of code reuse and, in many cases, an innate mechanism for neutral drift. Each graph GP technique provides a program representation, genetic operators and overarching evolutionary algorithm. This makes it difficult to identify the individual causes of empirical differences, both between these methods and in comparison to traditional GP. In this work, we empirically study the behaviour of Cartesian genetic programming (CGP), linear genetic programming (LGP), evolving graphs by graph programming and traditional GP. By fixing some aspects of the configurations, we study the performance of each graph GP method and GP in combination with three different EAs: generational, steady-state and <span>\\((1+\\lambda )\\)</span>. In general, we find that the best choice of representation, genetic operator and evolutionary algorithm depends on the problem domain. Further, we find that graph GP methods can increase search performance on complex real-world regression problems and, particularly in combination with the (<span>\\(1 + \\lambda\\)</span>) EA, are significantly better on digital circuit synthesis tasks. We further show that the reuse of intermediate results by tuning LGP’s number of registers and CGP’s levels back parameter is of utmost importance and contributes significantly to better convergence of an optimization algorithm when solving complex problems that benefit from code reuse.</p>","PeriodicalId":50424,"journal":{"name":"Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines","volume":"30 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10710-021-09413-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Graph representations promise several desirable properties for genetic programming (GP); multiple-output programs, natural representations of code reuse and, in many cases, an innate mechanism for neutral drift. Each graph GP technique provides a program representation, genetic operators and overarching evolutionary algorithm. This makes it difficult to identify the individual causes of empirical differences, both between these methods and in comparison to traditional GP. In this work, we empirically study the behaviour of Cartesian genetic programming (CGP), linear genetic programming (LGP), evolving graphs by graph programming and traditional GP. By fixing some aspects of the configurations, we study the performance of each graph GP method and GP in combination with three different EAs: generational, steady-state and \((1+\lambda )\). In general, we find that the best choice of representation, genetic operator and evolutionary algorithm depends on the problem domain. Further, we find that graph GP methods can increase search performance on complex real-world regression problems and, particularly in combination with the (\(1 + \lambda\)) EA, are significantly better on digital circuit synthesis tasks. We further show that the reuse of intermediate results by tuning LGP’s number of registers and CGP’s levels back parameter is of utmost importance and contributes significantly to better convergence of an optimization algorithm when solving complex problems that benefit from code reuse.

遗传规划中的图表示
图表示为遗传规划(GP)提供了几个理想的特性;多输出程序,代码重用的自然表示,以及在许多情况下,中性漂移的固有机制。每种图GP技术都提供了一个程序表示、遗传算子和总体进化算法。这使得很难确定这些方法之间以及与传统GP比较的经验差异的个别原因。本文主要研究了笛卡尔遗传规划(CGP)、线性遗传规划(LGP)、图规划进化图和传统遗传规划的行为。通过确定配置的某些方面,我们研究了每种图GP方法以及GP与三种不同的ea(分代、稳态和\((1+\lambda )\))组合的性能。一般来说,我们发现表示、遗传算子和进化算法的最佳选择取决于问题域。此外,我们发现图GP方法可以提高在复杂的现实世界回归问题上的搜索性能,特别是与(\(1 + \lambda\)) EA相结合,在数字电路合成任务上明显更好。我们进一步表明,通过调优LGP的寄存器数量和CGP的水平参数来重用中间结果是至关重要的,并且在解决从代码重用中受益的复杂问题时,显著有助于优化算法的更好收敛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines
Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 工程技术-计算机:理论方法
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.80%
发文量
19
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: A unique source reporting on methods for artificial evolution of programs and machines... Reports innovative and significant progress in automatic evolution of software and hardware. Features both theoretical and application papers. Covers hardware implementations, artificial life, molecular computing and emergent computation techniques. Examines such related topics as evolutionary algorithms with variable-size genomes, alternate methods of program induction, approaches to engineering systems development based on embryology, morphogenesis or other techniques inspired by adaptive natural systems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信