Robustness and Evolvability of Recombination in Linear Genetic Programming

The effect of neutrality on evolutionary search is known to be crucially dependent on the distribution of genotypes over phenotypes. Quantitatively characterizing robustness and evolvability in genotype and phenotype spaces greatly helps to understand the influence of neutrality on Genetic Programming. Most existing robustness and evolvability studies focus on mutations with a lack of investigation of recombinational operations. Here, we extend a previously proposed quantitative approach of measuring mutational robustness and evolvability in Linear GP. By considering a simple LGP system that has a compact representation and enumerable genotype and phenotype spaces, we quantitatively characterize the robustness and evolvability of recombination at the phenotypic level. In this simple yet representative LGP system, we show that recombinational properties are correlated with mutational properties. Utilizing a population evolution experiment, we demonstrate that recombination significantly accelerates the evolutionary search process and particularly promotes robust phenotypes that innovative phenotypic explorations.

[1]  Ting Hu,et al.  Robustness, Evolvability, and Accessibility in Linear Genetic Programming , 2011, EuroGP.

[2]  A. Wagner.  Robustness and evolvability: a paradox resolved , 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[3]  Jeffrey E. Barrick,et al.  Balancing Robustness and Evolvability , 2006, PLoS biology.

[4]  S. Otto,et al.  The Evolutionary Enigma of Sex , 2009, The American Naturalist.

[5]  Simon M. Poulding,et al.  A Rigorous Evaluation of Crossover and Mutation in Genetic Programming , 2009, EuroGP.

[6]  Julian Francis Miller,et al.  Through the Interaction of Neutral and Adaptive Mutations, Evolutionary Search Finds a Way , 2006, Artificial Life.

[7]  Peter Nordin,et al.  Homologous Crossover in Genetic Programming , 1999, GECCO.

[8]  S. Luke,et al.  A Comparison of Crossover and Mutation in Genetic Programming , 1997 .

[9]  G. Wagner,et al.  EVOLUTION AND DETECTION OF GENETIC ROBUSTNESS , 2003 .

[10]  Leslie G. Valiant,et al.  Evolvability , 2009, JACM.

[11]  B. Shraiman,et al.  Rate of Adaptation in Large Sexual Populations , 2010, Genetics.

[12]  Eric L. Miller,et al.  The Ascent of the Abundant: How Mutational Networks Constrain Evolution , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[13]  Terence Soule,et al.  An Analysis of the Causes of Code Growth in Genetic Programming , 2002, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[14]  James V. Hansen,et al.  Genetic Programming Experiments with Standard and Homologous Crossover Methods , 2003, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[15]  G. Wagner,et al.  Mutational robustness can facilitate adaptation , 2010, Nature.

[16]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  Effects of Recombination on Complex Regulatory Circuits , 2009, Genetics.

[17]  Philippe Collard,et al.  Maximum Homologous Crossover for Linear Genetic Programming , 2003, EuroGP.

[18]  Wolfgang Banzhaf,et al.  Genotype-Phenotype-Mapping and Neutral Variation - A Case Study in Genetic Programming , 1994, PPSN.

[19]  Wolfgang Banzhaf,et al.  Genetic Programming: An Introduction , 1997 .

[20]  Meredith V. Trotter,et al.  Robustness and evolvability. , 2010, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[21]  J. K. Kinnear,et al.  Advances in Genetic Programming , 1994 .

[22]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  An empirical investigation of how and why neutrality affects evolutionary search , 2006, GECCO '06.

[23]  Wolfgang Banzhaf,et al.  Evolution on Neutral Networks in Genetic Programming , 2006 .

[24]  Reinhard Männer,et al.  Parallel Problem Solving from Nature — PPSN III , 1994, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[25]  Peter Nordin,et al.  Genetic programming - An Introduction: On the Automatic Evolution of Computer Programs and Its Applications , 1998 .

[26]  Claus O. Wilke,et al.  Adaptive evolution on neutral networks , 2001, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[27]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  The low cost of recombination in creating novel phenotypes , 2011, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[28]  Scott A. Rifkin,et al.  Genetic Properties Influencing the Evolvability of Gene Expression , 2007, Science.

[29]  Terence Soule,et al.  Resilient Individuals Improve Evolutionary Search , 2006, Artificial Life.

[30]  Marc Ebner,et al.  How neutral networks influence evolvability , 2001, Complex..

[31]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  On the Search Properties of Different Crossover Operators in Genetic Programming , 2001 .

[32]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Redundant Representations in Evolutionary Computation , 2003, Evolutionary Computation.

[33]  Ting Hu,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics on multiple scales: a quantitative analysis of the interplay between genotype, phenotype, and fitness in linear genetic programming , 2012, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[34]  L. Altenberg.  The evolution of evolvability in genetic programming , 1994 .

[35]  A. Wagner.  Robustness, evolvability, and neutrality , 2005, FEBS letters.

[36]  P. Turner,et al.  Robustness promotes evolvability of thermotolerance in an RNA virus , 2008, BMC Evolutionary Biology.

[37]  C. Ofria,et al.  EVOLUTION AND DETECTION OF GENETIC ROBUSTNESS , 2003 .

[38]  Ting Hu,et al.  Neutrality and variability: two sides of evolvability in linear genetic programming , 2009, GECCO.

[39]  Kristen K. Dang,et al.  Sexual reproduction selects for robustness and negative epistasis in artificial gene networks , 2006, Nature.

[40]  M. Pigliucci.  Is evolvability evolvable? , 2008, Nature Reviews Genetics.