Learning individual mating preferences

ABSTRACT

Mate selection is a key step in evolutionary algorithms which traditionally has been panmictic and based solely on fitness. Various mate selection techniques have been published which show improved performance due to the introduction of mate restrictions or the use of genotypic/phenotypic features. Those techniques typically suffer from two major shortcomings: (1) they are fixed for the entire evolutionary run, which is suboptimal because problem specific mate selection may be expected to outperform general purpose mate selection and because the best mate selection configuration may be dependent on the state of the evolutionary run, and (2) they require problem specific tuning in order to obtain good performance, which often is a time consuming manual process. This paper introduces two versions of Learning Individual Mating Preferences (LIMP), a novel mate selection technique in which characteristics of good mates are learned during the evolutionary process. Centralized LIMP (C-LIMP) learns at the population level, while Decentralized LIMP (D-LIMP) learns at the individual level. Results are presented showing D-LIMP to outperform a traditional genetic algorithm (TGA), the Variable Dissortative Mating Genetic Algorithm (VDMGA), and C-LIMP on the DTRAP and MAXSAT benchmark problems, while both LIMP techniques perform comparably to VDMGA on NK Landscapes.

References

1. L. Booker. Improving the Performance of Genetic Algorithms in Classifier Systems. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 80--92, 1985.
2. R. Craighurst and W. Martin. Enhancing GA Performance through Crossover Prohibitions Based on Ancestry. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 130--135, San Francisco, California, USA, 1995. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
3. K. Deb and D. Goldberg. Analyzing Deception in Trap Functions. In Proceedings of FOGA II: the Second Workshop on Foundations of Genetic Algorithms, pages 93--108, 1992.
4. C. Fernandes and A. C. Rosa. Self-adjusting the Intensity of Assortative Mating in Genetic Algorithms. Soft Comput., 12:955--979, May 2008.
5. C. Fernandes, R. Tavares, C. Munteanu, and A. Rosa. Using Assortative Mating in Genetic Algorithms for Vector Quantization Problems. In Proceedings of SAC 2001: the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pages 361--365, New York, NY, USA, 2001. ACM.
6. R. Fry, S. Smith, and A. Tyrrell. A Self-Adaptive Mate Selection Model for Genetic Programming. In Proceedings of CEC 2005: the IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, volume 3, pages 2707 -- 2714, München, Germany, September 2005.
7. G. Harik. Finding Multimodal Solutions Using Restricted Tournament Selection. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 24--31. Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.
8. E. A. Holdener. The Art of Parameterless Evolutionary Algorithms. PhD thesis, Missouri University of Science and Technology, 2008.
9. E. A. Holdener and D. R. Tauritz. Learning Offspring Optimizing Mate Selection. In Proceedings of GECCO 2008: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 1109--1110, 2008. ACM.
10. R. Karp. Reducibility Among Combinatorial Problems. In R. Miller and J. Thatcher, editors, Complexity of Computer Computations, pages 85--103. Plenum Press, 1972.
11. S. A. Kauffman. Adaptation on Rugged Fitness Landscapes. Lectures in the Sciences of Complexity, 1:527--618, 1989.
12. C.-Y. Lee and E. Antonsson. Reinforcement Learning in Steady-state Cellular Genetic Algorithms. In Proceedings of CEC 2002: the IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, volume 2, pages 1793 -- 1797, May 2002.
13. G. Miller. Exploiting Mate Choice in Evolutionary Computation: Sexual Selection as a Process of Search, Optimization, And Diversification. In Selected Papers from AISB Workshop on Evolutionary Computing, pages 65--79, London, UK, 1994. Springer-Verlag.
14. M. Pelikan, D. Goldberg, and F. Lobo. A Survey of Optimization by Building and Using Probabilistic Models. Computational Optimization and Applications, 21(1):5--20, 2002.
15. W. R. M. U. K. Wickramasinghe, M. van Steen, and A. Eiben. Peer-to-peer Evolutionary Algorithms with Adaptive Autonomous Selection. In Proceedings of GECCO 2007: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 1460--1467, 2007. ACM.

Index Terms

• Computing methodologies

  • Artificial intelligence

    • Control methods

    • Search methodologies

  • Machine learning

• Mathematics of computing

  • Mathematical analysis

    • Mathematical optimization

• Theory of computation

  • Design and analysis of algorithms

    • Algorithm design techniques

      • Dynamic programming

    • Mathematical optimization