ptGAsGenetic Algorithms Evolving Noncoding Segments by Means of Promoter/Terminator Sequences

In this article we present work on chromosome structures for genetic algorithms (GAs) based on biological principles. Mainly, the influence of noncoding segments on GA behavior and performance is investigated. We compare representations with noncoding sequences at predefined, fixed locations with junk code induced by the use of promoter/terminator sequences (ptGAs) that define start and end of a coding sequence, respectively. AS one of the advantages of noncoding segments a few researchers have identified the reduction of the disruptive effects of crossover, and we solidify this argument by a formal analysis of crossover disruption probabilities for noncoding segments at fixed locations. The additional use of promoter/terminator sequences not only enables evolution of parameter values, but also allows for adaptation of number, size, and location of genes (problem parameters) on an artificial chromosome. Randomly generated chromosomes of fixed length carry different numbers of promoter/terminator sequences resulting in genes of varying size and location. Evolution of these ptGA chromosomes drives the number of parameters and their values to (sub)optimal solutions. Moreover, the formation of tightly linked building blocks is enhanced by self-organization of gene locations. We also introduce a new, nondisruptive crossover operator emerging from the ptGA gene structure with adaptive crossover rate, location, and number of crossover sites. For experimental comparisons of this genetic operator to conventional crossover in GAs, as well as properties of different ptGA chromosome structures, an artificial problem from the literature is utilized. Finally, the potential of ptGA is demonstrated on an NP-complete combinatorial optimization problem.

[1]  T. Cavalier-smith,et al.  Intron phylogeny: a new hypothesis. , 1991, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[2]  John R. Koza,et al.  Genetic programming - on the programming of computers by means of natural selection , 1993, Complex adaptive systems.

[3]  W. Ford Doolittle,et al.  Genes in pieces: were they ever together? , 1978, Nature.

[4]  Melanie Mitchell,et al.  The royal road for genetic algorithms: Fitness landscapes and GA performance , 1991 .

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

[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]  W. Gilbert,et al.  The exon theory of genes. , 1987, Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology.

[8]  T. Beebee,et al.  Gene structure and transcription , 1988 .

[9]  A. Wu.  Non-coding DNA and floating building blocks for the genetic algorithm , 1996 .

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

[11]  W. Gilbert,et al.  On the ancient nature of introns. , 1993, Gene.

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

[13]  Jamshid Ghaboussi,et al.  Implicit Representation in Genetic Algorithms Using Redundancy , 1997, Evolutionary Computation.

[14]  Thomas Bäck,et al.  The zero/one multiple knapsack problem and genetic algorithms , 1994, SAC '94.

[15]  Donald Ervin Knuth,et al.  The Art of Computer Programming , 1968 .

[16]  Gunar E. Liepins,et al.  Some Guidelines for Genetic Algorithms with Penalty Functions , 1989, ICGA.

[17]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  SGA-C: A C-language Implementation of a Simple Genetic Algorithm , 1991 .

[18]  Yoshiki Uchikawa,et al.  The effects of combination of DNA coding method with Pseudo-Bacterial GA , 1997, Proceedings of 1997 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation (ICEC '97).

[19]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  An Analysis of Reproduction and Crossover in a Binary-Coded Genetic Algorithm , 1987, ICGA.

[20]  Annie S. Wu,et al.  A Comparison of the Fixed and Floating Building Block Representation in the Genetic Algorithm , 1996, Evolutionary Computation.

[21]  J. Rogers,et al.  How were introns inserted into nuclear genes? , 1989, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[22]  T. Cavalier-smith.  The Evolution of genome size , 1985 .

[23]  Schloss Birlinghoven,et al.  How Genetic Algorithms Really Work I.mutation and Hillclimbing , 2022 .

[24]  C. G. Shaefer,et al.  The ARGOT Strategy: Adaptive Representation Genetic Optimizer Technique , 1987, ICGA.

[25]  Byung Ro Moon,et al.  Analyzing Hyperplane Synthesis in Genetic Algorithms Using Clustered Schemata , 1994, PPSN.

[26]  Stefan Fabry.  Frühe Introns – späte Introns? , 1995 .

[27]  P. Sharp,et al.  Splicing of messenger RNA precursors. , 1987, Annual Review of Biochemistry.

[28]  P. Nordin,et al.  Explicitly defined introns and destructive crossover in genetic programming , 1996 .

[29]  W. Gilbert.  Why genes in pieces? , 1978, Nature.

[30]  John E. Beasley,et al.  OR-Library: Distributing Test Problems by Electronic Mail , 1990 .

[31]  Helmut A. Mayer.  ptGAs - Genetic Algorithms Using Promoter/Terminator Sequences - Evolution of Number, Size, and Location of Parameters and Parts of the Representation , 1997 .