Analysing mutation schemes for real-parameter genetic algorithms

Mutation is an important operator in genetic algorithms GAs, as it ensures maintenance of diversity in evolving populations of GAs. Real-parameter GAs RGAs handle real-valued variables directly without going to a binary string representation of variables. Although RGAs were first suggested in early '90s, the mutation operator is still implemented variable-wise - in a manner that is independent to each variable. In this paper, we investigate the effect of five different mutation schemes for RGAs using two different mutation operators - polynomial and Gaussian mutation operators. Based on extensive simulation studies, it is observed that a mutation clock implementation is computationally quick and also efficient in finding a solution close to the optimum on four different problems used in this study for both mutation operators. Moreover, parametric studies with their associated parameters reveal suitable working ranges of the parameters. Interestingly, both mutation operators with their respective optimal parameter settings are found to possess a similar inherent probability of offspring creation, a matter that is believed to be the reason for their superior working. This study signifies that the long suggested mutation clock operator should be considered as a valuable mutation operator for RGAs.

[1]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Genetic Algorithms Plus Data Structures Equals Evolution Programs , 1994 .

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

[3]  S. Kobayashi,et al.  Multi-parental extension of the unimodal normal distribution crossover for real-coded genetic algorithms , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406).

[4]  KalyanmoyDebandSamirAgrawal KanpurGeneticAlgorithmsLaboratory,et al.  A Niched-Penalty Approach for Constraint Handling in Genetic Algorithms , 2002 .

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

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

[7]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Simulated Binary Crossover for Continuous Search Space , 1995, Complex Syst..

[8]  Masayuki Yamamura,et al.  Theoretical Analysis of Simplex Crossover for Real-Coded Genetic Algorithms , 2000, PPSN.

[9]  R. K. Ursem Multi-objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms , 2009 .

[10]  Heinz Mühlenbein,et al.  Fuzzy Recombination for the Breeder Genetic Algorithm , 1995, ICGA.

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

[12]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Non-Uniform Mapping in Binary-Coded Genetic Algorithms , 2014, BIC-TA.

[13]  Sabine Fenstermacher,et al.  Genetic Algorithms Data Structures Evolution Programs , 2016 .

[14]  Rajarshi Das,et al.  A Study of Control Parameters Affecting Online Performance of Genetic Algorithms for Function Optimization , 1989, ICGA.

[15]  Goldberg,et al.  Genetic algorithms , 1993, Robust Control Systems with Genetic Algorithms.

[16]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs , 1996, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.