Update Strength in EDAs and ACO: How to Avoid Genetic Drift

We provide a rigorous runtime analysis concerning the update strength, a vital parameter in probabilistic model-building GAs such as the step size 1/K in the compact Genetic Algorithm (cGA) and the evaporation factor ρ in ACO. While a large update strength is desirable for exploitation, there is a general trade-off: too strong updates can lead to genetic drift and poor performance. We demonstrate this trade-off for the cGA and a simple MMAS ACO algorithm on the OneMax function. More precisely, we obtain lower bounds on the expected runtime of Ω(K√n + n log n) and Ω(√n/ρ + n log n), respectively, showing that the update strength should be limited to 1/K, ρ = O(1/(√n log n)). In fact, choosing 1/K, ρ sim 1/(√n log n) both algorithms efficiently optimize OneMax in expected time O(n log n). Our analyses provide new insights into the stochastic behavior of probabilistic model-building GAs and propose new guidelines for setting the update strength in global optimization.

[1]  William Feller,et al.  An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications , 1951 .

[2]  Benjamin Doerr,et al.  Drift analysis and linear functions revisited , 2010, IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[3]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  The compact genetic algorithm , 1999, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[4]  I. Olkin,et al.  Inequalities: Theory of Majorization and Its Applications , 1980 .

[5]  Carsten Witt,et al.  Tight Bounds on the Optimization Time of a Randomized Search Heuristic on Linear Functions† , 2013, Combinatorics, Probability and Computing.

[6]  P. Stănică GOOD LOWER AND UPPER BOUNDS ON BINOMIAL COEFFICIENTS , 2001 .

[7]  Stefan Droste,et al.  A rigorous analysis of the compact genetic algorithm for linear functions , 2006, Natural Computing.

[8]  Per Kristian Lehre,et al.  When is an estimation of distribution algorithm better than an evolutionary algorithm? , 2009, 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[9]  P. Billingsley,et al.  Probability and Measure , 1980 .

[10]  L. Gleser On the Distribution of the Number of Successes in Independent Trials , 1975 .

[11]  Andrew M. Sutton,et al.  The Benefit of Recombination in Noisy Evolutionary Search , 2015, GECCO.

[12]  Daniel Johannsen,et al.  Random combinatorial structures and randomized search heuristics , 2010 .

[13]  Dirk Sudholt,et al.  A few ants are enough: ACO with iteration-best update , 2010, GECCO '10.

[14]  Dirk Sudholt,et al.  Analysis of different MMAS ACO algorithms on unimodal functions and plateaus , 2009, Swarm Intelligence.

[15]  Russ Bubley,et al.  Randomized algorithms , 1995, CSUR.

[16]  Dirk Sudholt,et al.  The choice of the offspring population size in the (1, λ) evolutionary algorithm , 2014, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[17]  Thomas Jansen,et al.  UNIVERSITY OF DORTMUND REIHE COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH CENTER 531 Design and Management of Complex Technical Processes and Systems by means of Computational Intelligence Methods Upper and Lower Bounds for Randomized Search Heuristics in Black-Box Optimization , 2004 .

[18]  Pietro Simone Oliveto,et al.  Improved time complexity analysis of the Simple Genetic Algorithm , 2015, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[19]  Thomas Stützle,et al.  MAX-MIN Ant System , 2000, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[20]  S. M. Samuels On the Number of Successes in Independent Trials , 1965 .

[21]  Martin Pelikan,et al.  An introduction and survey of estimation of distribution algorithms , 2011, Swarm Evol. Comput..

[22]  Carola Doerr,et al.  OneMax in Black-Box Models with Several Restrictions , 2015, Algorithmica.

[23]  Dirk Sudholt,et al.  A New Method for Lower Bounds on the Running Time of Evolutionary Algorithms , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[24]  Benjamin Doerr,et al.  Analyzing Randomized Search Heuristics: Tools from Probability Theory , 2011, Theory of Randomized Search Heuristics.

[25]  Duc-Cuong Dang,et al.  Simplified Runtime Analysis of Estimation of Distribution Algorithms , 2015, GECCO.