Sequential and distributed evolutionary algorithms for combinatorial optimization problems

This chapter compares the performance of six evolutionary algorithms, three sequential and three parallel, for solving combinatorial optimization problems. In particular, a generational, a steady-state, a cellular genetic algorithm, and their distributed versions were applied to the maximum cut problem, the error correcting code design problem, and the minimum tardy task problem. The algorithms were tested on a total of seven problem instances. The results obtained in this chapter are better than the ones previously reported in the literature in all cases except for one problem instance. The high quality results were achieved although no problem. specific changes of the evolutionary algorithms were made other than in the fitness function. Just the intrinsic search features of each class of algorithms proved to be powerful enough to solve a given problem instance. Some of the sequential, and almost every parallel algorithm, yielded fast and accurate results, although they sampled only a tiny fraction of the search space.

[1]  Raymond E. Miller,et al.  Complexity of Computer Computations , 1972 .

[2]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[3]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[4]  Shu Lin,et al.  Error control coding : fundamentals and applications , 1983 .

[5]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Genetic Algorithms in Search Optimization and Machine Learning , 1988 .

[6]  Bernard Manderick,et al.  Fine-Grained Parallel Genetic Algorithms , 1989, ICGA.

[7]  Kenneth DeJong,et al.  Discovery of maximal distance codes using genetic algorithms , 1990, [1990] Proceedings of the 2nd International IEEE Conference on Tools for Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Gilbert Syswerda,et al.  A Study of Reproduction in Generational and Steady State Genetic Algorithms , 1990, FOGA.

[9]  Thomas Bäck,et al.  An evolutionary approach to combinatorial optimization problems , 1994, CSC '94.

[10]  Peter Brucker,et al.  Scheduling Algorithms , 1995 .

[11]  Kenneth A. De Jong,et al.  An Analysis of the Effects of Neighborhood Size and Shape on Local Selection Algorithms , 1996, PPSN.

[12]  L. Darrell Whitley,et al.  Evaluating Evolutionary Algorithms , 1996, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Kenneth A. De Jong,et al.  Using Problem Generators to Explore the Effects of Epistasis , 1997, ICGA.

[14]  David H. Wolpert,et al.  No free lunch theorems for optimization , 1997, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[15]  Hao Chen,et al.  Parallel Genetic Simulated Annealing: A Massively Parallel SIMD Algorithm , 1998, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst..

[16]  Enrique Alba,et al.  A survey of parallel distributed genetic algorithms , 1999 .

[17]  Enrique Alba,et al.  Cellular Evolutionary Algorithms: Evaluating the Influence of Ratio , 2000, PPSN.

[18]  Enrique Alba,et al.  Analyzing synchronous and asynchronous parallel distributed genetic algorithms , 2001, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[19]  Enrique Alba,et al.  Applying Evolutionary Algorithms to Combinatorial Optimization Problems , 2001, International Conference on Computational Science.

[20]  Anany Levitin,et al.  Introduction to the Design and Analysis of Algorithms , 2002 .