Examining the Diversity Property of Semantic Similarity Based Crossover

Population diversity has long been seen as a crucial factor for the efficiency of Evolutionary Algorithms in general, and Genetic Programming (GP) in particular. This paper experimentally investigates the diversity property of a recently proposed crossover, Semantic Similarity based Crossover (SSC). The results show that while SSC helps to improve locality, it leads to the loss of diversity of the population. This could be the reason that sometimes SSC fails in achieving superior performance when compared to standard subtree crossover. Consequently, we introduce an approach to maintain the population diversity by combining SSC with a multi-population approach. The experimental results show that this combination maintains better population diversity, leading to further improvement in GP performance. Further SSC parameters tuning to promote diversity gains even better results.

[1]  Michael O'Neill,et al.  Semantic Aware Crossover for Genetic Programming: The Case for Real-Valued Function Regression , 2009, EuroGP.

[2]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  A Study of Diversity in Multipopulation Genetic Programming , 2003, Artificial Evolution.

[3]  Graham Kendall,et al.  Sampling of Unique Structures and Behaviours in Genetic Programming , 2004, EuroGP.

[4]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  On the Search Properties of Different Crossover Operators in Genetic Programming , 2001 .

[5]  Marc Schoenauer,et al.  Artificial Evolution , 2000, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[6]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  An Empirical Study of Multipopulation Genetic Programming , 2003, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[7]  Una-May O'Reilly,et al.  Program Search with a Hierarchical Variable Lenght Representation: Genetic Programming, Simulated Annealing and Hill Climbing , 1994, PPSN.

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

[9]  W. B. Langdon,et al.  Genetic Programming and Data Structures , 1998, The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science.

[10]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Representations for genetic and evolutionary algorithms , 2002, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing.

[11]  Nguyen Xuan Hoai,et al.  Representation and structural difficulty in genetic programming , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[12]  Moshe Looks,et al.  On the behavioral diversity of random programs , 2007, GECCO '07.

[13]  John J. Grefenstette,et al.  Genetic algorithms and their applications , 1987 .

[14]  Reinhard Männer,et al.  Parallel Problem Solving from Nature — PPSN III , 1994, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[15]  Colin G. Johnson,et al.  Semantically driven crossover in genetic programming , 2008, 2008 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence).

[16]  R. I. McKay,et al.  An Investigation of Fitness Sharing in Genetic Programming , 2002 .

[17]  Michael O'Neill,et al.  Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines Manuscript No. Semantically-based Crossover in Genetic Programming: Application to Real-valued Symbolic Regression , 2022 .

[18]  Reiko Tanese,et al.  Parallel Genetic Algorithms for a Hypercube , 1987, ICGA.

[19]  Graham Kendall,et al.  Diversity in genetic programming: an analysis of measures and correlation with fitness , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.