Viewing the Problem from Different Angles: A New Diversity Measure Based on Angular Distances
It is commonly believed that diversity is crucial for an evolutionary system to succeed, especially when the problem to be solved contains local optima from which the population cannot easily escape. There exist numerous methods to measure population diversity, but none of these have been shown to be consistently useful. In this paper, a new diversity measure is introduced, and it is shown that high diversity according to this new measure generally leads to a more successful overall evolution in most of the cases considered.
A. Ekárt and S. Z. Németh, “Maintaining the diversity of genetic programs,” in Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Genetic Programming, pp. 162–171, 2002.View at: Google Scholar
J. P. Rosca, “Genetic programming exploratory power and the discovery of functions,” in Proceedings of the 4th Annual Conference on Evolutionary Programming, pp. 719–736, 1995.View at: Google Scholar
J. P. Rosca, “Entropy-driven adaptive representation,” in Proceedings of the Workshop on Genetic Programming: From Theory to Real-World Applications, pp. 23–32, 1995.View at: Google Scholar
T. M. Mitchell, Machine Learning, McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1997.
P. H. McQuesten, Cultural enhancement of neuroevolution, Ph.D. dissertation, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, The University of Texas, Austin, Tex, USA, 2002.
V. Nissen and J. Propach, “On the robustness of population-based versus point-based optimization in the presence of noise,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 107–119, 1998.View at: Google Scholar
T. Smith, P. Husbands, P. Layzell, and M. O'Shea, “Fitness landscapes and evolvability,” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–34, 2002.View at: Google Scholar
T. Bäck, “Selective pressure in evolutionary algorithms: a characterizationof selection mechanisms,” in Proceedings of the 1st IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 57–62, 1994.View at: Google Scholar
T. Blickle and L. Thiele, “A comparison of selection schemes used in evolutionary algorithms,” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 361–394, 1996.View at: Google Scholar
D. E. Goldberg, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning, Addison-Wesley Longman, Boston, Mass, USA, 1989.
H.-P. Schwefel, Evolution and Optimum Seeking, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1995.
D. E. Goldberg, “Genetic algorithms, noise, and the sizing of populations,” Complex Systems, vol. 6, pp. 333–362, 1992.View at: Google Scholar
M. Fuchs, “Large populations are not always the best choice in genetic programming,” in Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO '99), pp. 1033–1038, 1999.View at: Google Scholar
J. R. Koza, Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural Selection, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1992.
H. Shimodaira, “Dcga: a diversity control oriented genetic algorithm,” in Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 367–374, 1997.View at: Google Scholar
U.-M. O'Reilly, “Using a distance metric on genetic programs to understand genetic operators,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, vol. 5, pp. 4092–4097, 1997.View at: Google Scholar
E. Burke, S. Gustafson, and G. Kendall, “A survey and analysis of diversity measures in genetic programming,” in Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pp. 716–723, 2002.View at: Google Scholar
A. E. Magurran, Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 1988.
R. Olsson, “Inductive functional programming using incremental program transformation,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 55–81, 1995.View at: Google Scholar
L. B. Booker, D. E. Goldberg, and J. H. Holland, “Classifier systems and genetic algorithms,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 40, no. 1–3, pp. 235–282, 1989.View at: Google Scholar
N. R. Draper and H. Smith, Applied Regression Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 3rd edition, 1998.
S. Haykin, Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2nd edition, 1999.
R. Olsson, “The art of writing specifications for the adate automatic programming system,” in Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference on Genetic Programmin, pp. 278–283, 1998.View at: Google Scholar
S. Gustafson, E. K. Burke, and G. Kendall, “Sampling of unique structures and behaviours in genetic programming,” in Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Genetic Programming, vol. 3003 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 279–288, 2004.View at: Google Scholar
G. Zenobi and P. Cunningham, “Using diversity in preparing ensembles of classifiers based on different feature subsets to minimize generalization error,” in Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Machine Learning (ECML '01), pp. 576–587, Freiburg, Germany, September 2001.View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. G. Dietterich, “Ensemble methods in machine learning,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Multiple Classifier Systems, pp. 1–15, 2000.View at: Google Scholar
O. Takahashi and S. Kobayashi, “An angular distance dependent alternation model for real-coded genetic algorithms,” in Proceedings of the Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC '04), vol. 2, pp. 2159–2165, 2004.View at: Google Scholar
T. Bäck, Evolutionary Algorithms in Theory and Practice, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1996.
C. Spearman, “The proof and measurement of association between two things,” The American Journal of Psychology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 72–101, 1904.View at: Google Scholar
B. Sareni and L. Krähenbühl, “Fitness sharing and niching methods revisited,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 97–106, 1998.View at: Google Scholar
P. Darwen and X. Yao, “Every niching method has its niche: fitness sharing and implicit sharing compared,” in Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, vol. 1141 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 398–407, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1996.View at: Google Scholar
C. D. Rosin and R. K. Belew, “New methods for competitive coevolution,” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–29, 1997.View at: Google Scholar