An Empirical Comparison of Seven Iterative and Evolutionary Function Optimization Heuristics

Abstract : This report is a repository of the results obtained from a large scale empirical comparison of seven iterative and evolution-based optimization heuristics. Twenty-seven static optimization problems, spanning six sets of problem classes which are commonly explored in genetic algorithm literature, are examined. The problem sets include job-shop scheduling, traveling, salesman, knapsack, binpacking, neural network weight optimization, and standard numerical optimization. The search spaces in these problems range from 2368 to 22040. The results indicate that using genetic algorithms for the optimization of static functions does not yield a benefit, in terms of the final answer obtained, over simpler optimization heuristics. Descriptions of the algorithms tested and the encodings of the problems are described in detail for reproducibility.

[1]  K. Dejong,et al.  An analysis of the behavior of a class of genetic adaptive systems , 1975 .

[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 H. Ackley,et al.  An empirical study of bit vector function optimization , 1987 .

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

[5]  Gilbert Syswerda,et al.  Uniform Crossover in Genetic Algorithms , 1989, ICGA.

[6]  L. Darrell Whitley,et al.  GENITOR II: a distributed genetic algorithm , 1990, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[7]  Lashon B. Booker,et al.  Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Genetic algorithms , 1991 .

[8]  Lawrence Davis,et al.  Bit-Climbing, Representational Bias, and Test Suite Design , 1991, ICGA.

[9]  Anders Krogh,et al.  Introduction to the theory of neural computation , 1994, The advanced book program.

[10]  Gilbert Syswerda,et al.  Simulated Crossover in Genetic Algorithms , 1992, FOGA.

[11]  Kennetb A. De.  Genetic Algorithms Are NOT Function Optimizers , 1992 .

[12]  J. D. Schaffer,et al.  Real-Coded Genetic Algorithms and Interval-Schemata , 1992, FOGA.

[13]  Takeshi Yamada,et al.  The ECOlogical Framework II : Improving GA Performance At Virtually Zero Cost , 1993, ICGA.

[14]  David A. Cohn,et al.  Neural Network Exploration Using Optimal Experiment Design , 1993, NIPS.

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

[16]  Peter Ross,et al.  A Promising Genetic Algorithm Approach to Job-Shop SchedulingRe-Schedulingand Open-Shop Scheduling Problems , 1993, ICGA.

[17]  John H. Holland,et al.  When will a Genetic Algorithm Outperform Hill Climbing , 1993, NIPS.

[18]  Shumeet Baluja,et al.  The Evolution of Gennetic Algorithms: Towards Massive Parallelism , 1993, ICML.

[19]  Larry J. Eshelman,et al.  Crossover's Niche , 1993, ICGA.

[20]  L. Darrell Whitley,et al.  Serial and Parallel Genetic Algorithms as Function Optimizers , 1993, ICGA.

[21]  John J. Grefenstette,et al.  Genetic Algorithms for Tracking Changing Environments , 1993, ICGA.

[22]  Shumeet Baluja,et al.  A Method for Integrating Genetic Search Based Function Optimization and Competitive Learning , 1994 .

[23]  Rich Caruana,et al.  Removing the Genetics from the Standard Genetic Algorithm , 1995, ICML.

[24]  Martin Wattenberg,et al.  Stochastic Hillclimbing as a Baseline Mathod for Evaluating Genetic Algorithms , 1995, NIPS.