Symbolic regression in dynamic scenarios with gradually changing targets

Abstract Symbolic regression is a machine learning task: given a training dataset with features and targets, find a symbolic function that best predicts the target given the features. This paper concentrates on dynamic regression tasks, i.e. tasks where the goal changes during the model fitting process. Our study is motivated by dynamic regression tasks originating in the domain of reinforcement learning: we study four dynamic symbolic regression problems related to well-known reinforcement learning benchmarks, with data generated from the standard Value Iteration algorithm. We first show that in these problems the target function changes gradually, with no abrupt changes. Even these gradual changes, however, are a challenge to traditional Genetic Programming-based Symbolic Regression algorithms because they rely only on expression manipulation and selection. To address this challenge, we present an enhancement to such algorithms suitable for dynamic scenarios with gradual changes, namely the recently introduced type of leaf nodes called Linear Combination of Features. This type of leaf node, aided by the error backpropagation technique known from artificial neural networks, enables the algorithm to better fit the data by utilizing the error gradient to its advantage rather than searching blindly using only the fitness values. This setup is compared with a baseline of the core algorithm without any of our improvements and also with a classic evolutionary dynamic optimization technique: hypermutation. The results show that the proposed modifications greatly improve the algorithm ability to track a gradually changing target.

[1]  Terence C. Fogarty,et al.  Learning the local search range for genetic optimisation in nonstationary environments , 1997, Proceedings of 1997 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation (ICEC '97).

[2]  Helio J. C. Barbosa,et al.  Symbolic regression via genetic programming , 2000, Proceedings. Vol.1. Sixth Brazilian Symposium on Neural Networks.

[3]  John J. Grefenstette,et al.  Genetic Algorithms for Changing Environments , 1992, PPSN.

[4]  Shengxiang Yang,et al.  On the Design of Diploid Genetic Algorithms for Problem Optimization in Dynamic Environments , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation.

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

[6]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Nonstationary Function Optimization Using Genetic Algorithms with Dominance and Diploidy , 1987, ICGA.

[7]  Mihir Sen,et al.  Heat transfer correlations by symbolic regression , 2006 .

[8]  Ernesto Costa,et al.  On biologically inspired genetic operators: transformation in the standard genetic algorithm , 2001 .

[9]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Searching for optima in non-stationary environments , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406).

[10]  Kalyan Veeramachaneni,et al.  Building Predictive Models via Feature Synthesis , 2015, GECCO.

[11]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Learning representations by back-propagating errors , 1986, Nature.

[12]  Bart De Schutter,et al.  Approximate dynamic programming with a fuzzy parameterization , 2010, Autom..

[13]  Lino Marques,et al.  Genetic Programming Algorithms for Dynamic Environments , 2016, EvoApplications.

[14]  Christian Igel,et al.  Empirical evaluation of the improved Rprop learning algorithms , 2003, Neurocomputing.

[15]  Mengjie Zhang,et al.  Continuously Evolving Programs in Genetic Programming Using Gradient Descent , 2004 .

[16]  Karel Slaný,et al.  Cartesian Genetic Programming in a changing environment , 2015, 2015 7th International Joint Conference on Computational Intelligence (IJCCI).

[17]  Robert Babuška,et al.  Optimal Control via Reinforcement Learning with Symbolic Policy Approximation , 2017 .

[18]  Shengxiang Yang,et al.  A hybrid immigrants scheme for genetic algorithms in dynamic environments , 2007, Int. J. Autom. Comput..

[19]  Christian Igel,et al.  Improving the Rprop Learning Algorithm , 2000 .

[20]  Mengjie Zhang,et al.  Genetic Programming with Gradient Descent Search for Multiclass Object Classification , 2004, EuroGP.

[21]  Leonardo Trujillo,et al.  On the Use of Dynamic GP Fitness Cases in Static and Dynamic Optimisation Problems , 2017, Artificial Evolution.

[22]  Shengxiang Yang,et al.  Evolutionary dynamic optimization: A survey of the state of the art , 2012, Swarm Evol. Comput..

[23]  Anabela Simões,et al.  Memory-based CHC algorithms for the dynamic traveling salesman problem , 2011, GECCO '11.

[24]  Robert Babuska,et al.  Enhanced Symbolic Regression Through Local Variable Transformations , 2017, IJCCI.

[25]  Jürgen Branke,et al.  Memory enhanced evolutionary algorithms for changing optimization problems , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406).

[26]  Tom Lenaerts,et al.  Raising the Dead: Extending Evolutionary Algorithms with a Case-Based Memory , 2001, EuroGP.

[27]  Xin Yao,et al.  Population-Based Incremental Learning With Associative Memory for Dynamic Environments , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[28]  Hussein A. Abbass,et al.  Multiobjective optimization for dynamic environments , 2005, 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[29]  A. Topchy,et al.  Faster genetic programming based on local gradient search of numeric leaf values , 2001 .

[30]  Anthony Brabazon,et al.  Towards a dynamic benchmark for genetic programming , 2013, GECCO '13 Companion.

[31]  Richard LeBoeuf,et al.  A Magnus Wind Turbine Power Model Based on Direct Solutions Using the Blade Element Momentum Theory and Symbolic Regression , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy.

[32]  Maarten Keijzer,et al.  Scaled Symbolic Regression , 2004, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[33]  Petr Posík,et al.  Linear combinations of features as leaf nodes in symbolic regression , 2017, GECCO.

[34]  Stephan M. Winkler,et al.  Effects of constant optimization by nonlinear least squares minimization in symbolic regression , 2013, GECCO.