Assessment of problem modality by differential performance of lexicase selection in genetic programming: a preliminary report

Many potential target problems for genetic programming are modal in the sense that qualitatively different modes of response are required for inputs from different regions of the problem's domain. This paper presents a new approach to solving modal problems with genetic programming, using a simple and novel parent selection method called lexicase selection. It then shows how the differential performance of genetic programming with and without lexicase selection can be used to provide a measure of problem modality, and it argues that defining such a measure in this way is not as methodologically problematic as it may initially appear. The modality measure is illustrated through the analysis of genetic programming runs on a simple modal symbolic regression problem. This is a preliminary report that is intended in part to stimulate discussion on the significance of modal problems, methods for solving them, and methods for measuring the modality of problems. Although the core concepts in this paper are presented in the context of genetic programming, they are also relevant to applications of other forms of evolutionary computation to modal problems.

[1]  Lior Rokach,et al.  Taxonomy for characterizing ensemble methods in classification tasks: A review and annotated bibliography , 2009, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[2]  Mark Kotanchek,et al.  Pursuing the Pareto Paradigm: Tournaments, Algorithm Variations and Ordinal Optimization , 2007 .

[3]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  A Field Guide to Genetic Programming , 2008 .

[4]  Karl Benson Evolving Automatic Target Detection Algorithms by Logically Combining Decision Spaces , 2000, BMVC.

[5]  Rolf Drechsler,et al.  Priorities in multi-objective optimization for genetic programming , 2001 .

[6]  Lee Spector,et al.  Genetic Programming with Historically Assessed Hardness , 2009 .

[7]  William B. Langdon,et al.  Genetic programming for combining classifiers , 2001 .

[8]  Sean Luke,et al.  Lexicographic Parsimony Pressure , 2002, GECCO.

[9]  Terence Soule,et al.  Ensemble Classifiers: AdaBoost and Orthogonal Evolution of Teams , 2011 .

[10]  Sean Luke,et al.  Alternative Bloat Control Methods , 2004, GECCO.

[11]  Terence Soule,et al.  Behavioral Diversity and a Probabilistically Optimal GP Ensemble , 2004, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[12]  Leonardo Vanneschi,et al.  Difficulty of Unimodal and Multimodal Landscapes in Genetic Programming , 2003, GECCO.

[13]  L. Spector,et al.  Trivial Geography in Genetic Programming , 2006 .

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

[15]  S. B. Atienza-Samols,et al.  With Contributions by , 1978 .

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

[17]  William B. Langdon,et al.  Genetic Programming and Data Structures: Genetic Programming + Data Structures = Automatic Programming! , 1998 .