The Edge-Set Encoding Revisited: On the Bias of a Direct Representation for Trees

The edge-set encoding is a direct tree representation which directly represents trees as sets of edges. There are two variants of the edge-set encoding: the edge-set encoding without heuristics, and the edge-set encoding with heuristics. An investigation into the bias of the edge-set encoding shows that the crossover operator of the edge-set encoding without heuristics is unbiased, that means it does not favor particular types of trees. In contrast, the crossover operator with heuristics is biased towards the simple minimum spanning tree (MST) and generates more likely trees that are MST-like. As a result, the performance of the edge-set encoding without heuristics does not depend on the structure of the optimal solution. Using the heuristic crossover operator results only in high genetic algorithm (GA) performance if the optimal solution of the problem is slightly different from the simple MST. However, if the optimal solution is not very similar to the simple MST a GA using the heuristic crossover operator fails and is not able to find the optimal solution. Therefore, it is recommended that the edge-set encoding with heuristics should only be used if it is known a priori that the optimal solution is very similar to the simple MST. If this is not known a priori, other unbiased search operators and representations should be used.

[1]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Decision procedures for multiple auctions , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[2]  Claudio Bartolini,et al.  Agent-based service composition through simultaneous negotiation in forward and reverse auctions , 2003, EC '03.

[3]  Martin L. Puterman,et al.  Markov Decision Processes: Discrete Stochastic Dynamic Programming , 1994 .

[4]  P. Klemperer Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature , 1999 .

[5]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Developing a bidding agent for multiple heterogeneous auctions , 2003, TOIT.

[6]  Andrew Byde,et al.  A Comparison among Bidding Algorithms for Multiple Auctions , 2002, AMEC.

[7]  Yu Li,et al.  A New Genetic Algorithm for the Optimal Communication Spanning Tree Problem , 1999, Artificial Evolution.

[8]  Amy Greenwald The 2002 Trading Agent Competition: An Overview of Agent Strategies , 2003, AI Mag..

[9]  M. P. Wellman,et al.  Price Prediction in a Trading Agent Competition , 2004, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[10]  Samir Khuller,et al.  A Network-Flow Technique for Finding Low-Weight Bounded-Degree Spanning Trees , 1996, J. Algorithms.

[11]  Mitsuo Gen,et al.  Genetic algorithm for solving bicriteria network topology design problem , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406).

[12]  Mihalis Yannakakis,et al.  Optimization, approximation, and complexity classes , 1991, STOC '88.

[13]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Network Random KeysA Tree Representation Scheme for Genetic and Evolutionary Algorithms , 2002, Evolutionary Computation.

[14]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  SouthamptonTAC: An adaptive autonomous trading agent , 2003, TOIT.

[15]  Ivan Phillips,et al.  Algorithm Design for Agents which Participate in Multiple Simultaneous Auctions , 2000, AMEC.

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

[17]  Guido Governatori,et al.  A probabilistic approach to automated bidding in alternative auctions , 2002, WWW '02.

[18]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  On the Optimal Communication Spanning Tree Problem , 2003 .

[19]  Subhash C. Narula,et al.  Degree-constrained minimum spanning tree , 1980, Comput. Oper. Res..

[20]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  Sequential Auctions for the Allocation of Resources with Complementarities , 1999, IJCAI.

[21]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Negotiation decision functions for autonomous agents , 1998, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[22]  Chao-Hsien Chu,et al.  Genetic algorithms for communications network design - an empirical study of the factors that influence performance , 2001, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[23]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Possibility Theory as a Basis for Qualitative Decision Theory , 1995, IJCAI.

[24]  Eduardo L. Gim,et al.  Possibilistic-Based Design of Bidding Strategies in Electronic Auctions , 1998 .

[25]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  Decision-Theoretic Planning: Structural Assumptions and Computational Leverage , 1999, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[26]  Bryant A. Julstrom,et al.  Edge sets: an effective evolutionary coding of spanning trees , 2003, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[27]  Charles C. Palmer,et al.  An approach to a problem in network design using genetic algorithms , 1994, Networks.

[28]  Claudio Bartolini,et al.  Economic dynamics of agents in multiple auctions , 2001, AGENTS '01.

[29]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Network random keys-a tree network representation scheme for genetic and evolutionary algorithms , 2000 .

[30]  R. McAfee,et al.  Auctions and Bidding , 1986 .

[31]  Sudipto Guha,et al.  Approximating a finite metric by a small number of tree metrics , 1998, Proceedings 39th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No.98CB36280).

[32]  Andrew Byde A Dynamic Programming Model for Algorithm Design in Simultaneous Auctions , 2001, WELCOM.

[33]  David A. McAllester,et al.  Decision-Theoretic Bidding Based on Learned Density Models in Simultaneous, Interacting Auctions , 2003, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[34]  G. Raidl,et al.  Prüfer numbers: a poor representation of spanning trees for evolutionary search , 2001 .

[35]  Michael P. Wellman,et al.  Walverine: a Walrasian trading agent , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[36]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[37]  Frank Dignum,et al.  Agent-Mediated Electronic Commerce III: Current Issues in Agent-Based Electronic Commerce Systems , 2001 .

[38]  T. C. Hu Optimum Communication Spanning Trees , 1974, SIAM J. Comput..

[39]  Charles C. Palmer,et al.  Representing trees in genetic algorithms , 1994, Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence.

[40]  Kee-Eung Kim,et al.  Solving Very Large Weakly Coupled Markov Decision Processes , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.

[41]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Redundant Representations in Evolutionary Computation , 2003, Evolutionary Computation.