A parallel and distributed semantic Genetic Programming system

In the last few years, geometric semantic genetic programming has incremented its popularity, obtaining interesting results on several real life applications. Nevertheless, the large size of the solutions generated by geometric semantic genetic programming is still an issue, in particular for those applications in which reading and interpreting the final solution is desirable. In this paper, we introduce a new parallel and distributed genetic programming system, with the objective of mitigating this drawback. The proposed system (called MPHGP, which stands for Multi-Population Hybrid Genetic Programming) is composed by two subpopulations, one of which runs geometric semantic genetic programming, while the other runs a standard multi-objective genetic programming algorithm that optimizes, at the same time, training error and the size of the solutions. The two subpopulations evolve independently and in parallel, exchanging individuals at prefixed synchronization instants. The presented experimental results, obtained on five real-life symbolic regression applications, suggest that MPHGP is able to find solutions that are comparable, or even better, than the ones found by geometric semantic genetic programming, both on training and on unseen testing data. At the same time, MPHGP is also able to find solutions that are significantly smaller than the ones found by geometric semantic genetic programming.

[1]  John R. Koza,et al.  Genetic programming - on the programming of computers by means of natural selection , 1993, Complex adaptive systems.

[2]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  A New Implementation of Geometric Semantic GP and Its Application to Problems in Pharmacokinetics , 2013, EuroGP.

[3]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  Genetic programming for computational pharmacokinetics in drug discovery and development , 2007, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[4]  John R. Koza,et al.  Human-competitive results produced by genetic programming , 2010, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[5]  William D. Smart,et al.  Program Simplification in Genetic Programming for Object Classification , 2005, KES.

[6]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming for Real Life Applications , 2013, GPTP.

[7]  Krzysztof Krawiec,et al.  Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming , 2012, PPSN.

[8]  Krzysztof Krawiec,et al.  Approximating geometric crossover in semantic space , 2009, GECCO.

[9]  Dick den Hertog,et al.  Order of Nonlinearity as a Complexity Measure for Models Generated by Symbolic Regression via Pareto Genetic Programming , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[10]  Ernesto Costa,et al.  Dynamic limits for bloat control in genetic programming and a review of past and current bloat theories , 2009, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[11]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  A C++ framework for geometric semantic genetic programming , 2014, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[12]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  An Introduction to Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming , 2015, NEO.

[13]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[14]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  Prediction of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale assessment using a genetic programming system with geometric semantic genetic operators , 2014, Expert Syst. Appl..

[15]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  Prediction of high performance concrete strength using Genetic Programming with geometric semantic genetic operators , 2013, Expert Syst. Appl..

[16]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  An Empirical Study of Multipopulation Genetic Programming , 2003, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[17]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  A survey of semantic methods in genetic programming , 2014, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[18]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  Prediction of energy performance of residential buildings: a genetic programming approach , 2015 .