A novel human-computer collaboration: combining novelty search with interactive evolution

Recent work on novelty and behavioral diversity in evolutionary computation has highlighted the potential disadvantage of driving search purely through objective means. This paper suggests that leveraging human insight during search can complement such novelty-driven approaches. In particular, a new approach called novelty-assisted interactive evolutionary computation (NA-IEC) combines human intuition with novelty search to facilitate the serendipitous discovery of agent behaviors in a deceptive maze. In this approach, the human user directs evolution by selecting what is interesting from the on-screen population of behaviors. However, unlike in typical IEC, the user can now request that the next generation be filled with novel descendants. The experimental results demonstrate that combining human insight with novelty search not only finds solutions significantly faster and at lower genomic complexities than fully-automated processes guided purely by fitness or novelty, but it also finds solutions faster than the traditional IEC approach. Such results add to the evidence that combining human users and automated processes creates a synergistic effect in the search for solutions.

[1]  R. Dawkins The Blind Watchmaker , 1986 .

[2]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Genetic Algorithms with Sharing for Multimodalfunction Optimization , 1987, ICGA.

[3]  Clive Richards,et al.  The Blind Watchmaker , 1987, Bristol Medico-Chirurgical Journal.

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

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

[6]  L. Darrell Whitley,et al.  Fundamental Principles of Deception in Genetic Search , 1990, FOGA.

[7]  Thomas M. Cover,et al.  Elements of Information Theory , 2005 .

[8]  Michiel van de Panne,et al.  Guided Optimization for Balanced Locomotion , 1995 .

[9]  Thomas Bck,et al.  Evolutionary computation: Toward a new philosophy of machine intelligence , 1997, Complex..

[10]  D. Goldberg,et al.  Escaping hierarchical traps with competent genetic algorithms , 2001 .

[11]  Hideyuki Takagi,et al.  Interactive evolutionary computation: fusion of the capabilities of EC optimization and human evaluation , 2001, Proc. IEEE.

[12]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Evolving Neural Networks through Augmenting Topologies , 2002, Evolutionary Computation.

[13]  Phil Husbands,et al.  Evolution of central pattern generators for bipedal walking in a real-time physics environment , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[14]  A. E. Eiben,et al.  Introduction to Evolutionary Computing , 2003, Natural Computing Series.

[15]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Competitive Coevolution through Evolutionary Complexification , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[16]  Edwin D. de Jong,et al.  The Incremental Pareto-Coevolution Archive , 2004, GECCO.

[17]  Charles E. Hughes,et al.  Conflict Resolution and a Framework for Collaborative Interactive Evolution , 2006, AAAI.

[18]  David B. Fogel,et al.  Evolutionary Computation: Toward a New Philosophy of Machine Intelligence (IEEE Press Series on Computational Intelligence) , 2006 .

[19]  Penousal Machado,et al.  The Art of Artificial Evolution: A Handbook on Evolutionary Art and Music , 2007 .

[20]  Jimmy Secretan,et al.  Picbreeder: evolving pictures collaboratively online , 2008, CHI.

[21]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Exploiting Open-Endedness to Solve Problems Through the Search for Novelty , 2008, ALIFE.

[22]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Revising the evolutionary computation abstraction: minimal criteria novelty search , 2010, GECCO '10.

[23]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Efficiently evolving programs through the search for novelty , 2010, GECCO '10.

[24]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Abandoning Objectives: Evolution Through the Search for Novelty Alone , 2011, Evolutionary Computation.

[25]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Novelty Search and the Problem with Objectives , 2011 .

[26]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Picbreeder: A Case Study in Collaborative Evolutionary Exploration of Design Space , 2011, Evolutionary Computation.

[27]  Jean-Baptiste Mouret Novelty-Based Multiobjectivization , 2011 .

[28]  Sebastian Risi,et al.  Enhancing es-hyperneat to evolve more complex regular neural networks , 2011, GECCO '11.

[29]  Shimon Whiteson,et al.  Critical factors in the performance of novelty search , 2011, GECCO '11.

[30]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  On the deleterious effects of a priori objectives on evolution and representation , 2011, GECCO '11.

[31]  Josh C. Bongard,et al.  Accelerating human-computer collaborative search through learning comparative and predictive user models , 2012, GECCO '12.

[32]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  The future of citizen science: emerging technologies and shifting paradigms , 2012, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.

[33]  Josh C. Bongard,et al.  Combining fitness-based search and user modeling in evolutionary robotics , 2013, GECCO '13.

[34]  Leonardo Trujillo,et al.  Searching for novel clustering programs , 2013, GECCO '13.

[35]  Anders Lyhne Christensen,et al.  Evolution of swarm robotics systems with novelty search , 2013, Swarm Intelligence.