Adaptive Linkage Crossover

Problem-specific knowledge is often implemented in search algorithms using heuristics to determine which search paths are to be explored at any given instant. As in other search methods, utilizing this knowledge will more quickly lead a genetic algorithm (GA) towards better results. In many problems, crucial knowledge is not found in individual components, but in the interrelations between those components. For such problems, we develop an interrelation (linkage) based crossover operator that has the advantage of liberating GAs from the constraints imposed by the fixed representations generally chosen for problems. The strength of linkages between components of a chromosomal structure can be explicitly represented in a linkage matrix and used in the reproduction step to generate new individuals. For some problems, such a linkage matrix is known a priori from the nature of the problem. In other cases, the linkage matrix may be learned by successive minor adaptations during the execution of the evolutionary algorithm. This paper demonstrates the success of such an approach for several problems.

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

[2]  Chilukuri K. Mohan,et al.  Linkage crossover operator for genetic algorithms , 1999 .

[3]  Gang Wang,et al.  Revisiting the GEMGA: scalable evolutionary optimization through linkage learning , 1998, 1998 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation Proceedings. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence (Cat. No.98TH8360).

[4]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Messy Genetic Algorithms: Motivation, Analysis, and First Results , 1989, Complex Syst..

[5]  Heinz Mühlenbein,et al.  Schemata, Distributions and Graphical Models in Evolutionary Optimization , 1999, J. Heuristics.

[6]  V.A. Kazakov,et al.  Evolving building blocks for genetic algorithms using genetic engineering , 1995, Proceedings of 1995 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  James R. Levenick.  Inserting Introns Improves Genetic Algorithm Success Rate: Taking a Cue from Biology , 1991, ICGA.

[8]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  AllelesLociand the Traveling Salesman Problem , 1985, ICGA.

[9]  J. David Schaffer,et al.  An Adaptive Crossover Distribution Mechanism for Genetic Algorithms , 1987, ICGA.

[10]  Kishan G. Mehrotra,et al.  Adaptive Linkage Crossover , 1998, Evolutionary Computation.

[11]  G. Harik.  Learning gene linkage to efficiently solve problems of bounded difficulty using genetic algorithms , 1997 .

[12]  K. Deb.  Binary and floating-point function optimization using messy genetic algorithms , 1991 .

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

[14]  Kishan G. Mehrotra,et al.  Genetic algorithms for graph partitioning and incremental graph partitioning , 1994, Proceedings of Supercomputing '94.

[15]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Alleles, loci and the traveling salesman problem , 1985 .

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

[17]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  RapidAccurate Optimization of Difficult Problems Using Fast Messy Genetic Algorithms , 1993, ICGA.

[18]  D. Wolpert,et al.  No Free Lunch Theorems for Search , 1995 .

[19]  D. E. Goldberg,et al.  Genetic Algorithms in Search , 1989 .

[20]  James R. Levenick,et al.  Metabits: Generic Endogenous Crossover Control , 1995, International Conference on Genetic Algorithms.

[21]  Jim Smith,et al.  Recombination strategy adaptation via evolution of gene linkage , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation.

[22]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Massive Multimodality, Deception, and Genetic Algorithms , 1992, PPSN.

[23]  K. Mehrotra,et al.  Linkage crossover for genetic algorithms , 1999 .

[24]  Hillol Kargupta,et al.  The Gene Expression Messy Genetic Algorithm , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation.

[25]  R. Wainwright,et al.  Techniques for reducing the disruption of superior building blocks in genetic algorithms , 1994 .

[26]  Kishan G. Mehrotra,et al.  Knowledge-based nonuniform crossover , 1994, Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence.

[27]  Jan Paredis,et al.  The Symbiotic Evolution of Solutions and Their Representations , 1995, International Conference on Genetic Algorithms.

[28]  Gunar E. Liepins,et al.  Deceptiveness and Genetic Algorithm Dynamics , 1990, FOGA.