A New Framework for Analysis of Coevolutionary Systems—Directed Graph Representation and Random Walks

Studying coevolutionary systems in the context of simplified models (i.e., games with pairwise interactions between coevolving solutions modeled as self plays) remains an open challenge since the rich underlying structures associated with pairwise-comparison-based fitness measures are often not taken fully into account. Although cyclic dynamics have been demonstrated in several contexts (such as intransitivity in coevolutionary problems), there is no complete characterization of cycle structures and their effects on coevolutionary search. We develop a new framework to address this issue. At the core of our approach is the directed graph (digraph) representation of coevolutionary problems that fully captures structures in the relations between candidate solutions. Coevolutionary processes are modeled as a specific type of Markov chains—random walks on digraphs. Using this framework, we show that coevolutionary problems admit a qualitative characterization: a coevolutionary problem is either solvable (there is a subset of solutions that dominates the remaining candidate solutions) or not. This has an implication on coevolutionary search. We further develop our framework that provides the means to construct quantitative tools for analysis of coevolutionary processes and demonstrate their applications through case studies. We show that coevolution of solvable problems corresponds to an absorbing Markov chain for which we can compute the expected hitting time of the absorbing class. Otherwise, coevolution will cycle indefinitely and the quantity of interest will be the limiting invariant distribution of the Markov chain. We also provide an index for characterizing complexity in coevolutionary problems and show how they can be generated in a controlled manner.

[1]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  The travelling thief problem: The first step in the transition from theoretical problems to realistic problems , 2013, 2013 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[2]  Gregory Gutin,et al.  A classification of locally semicomplete digraphs , 1997, Discret. Math..

[3]  Jordan B. Pollack,et al.  A game-theoretic and dynamical-systems analysis of selection methods in coevolution , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[4]  V. Climenhaga Markov chains and mixing times , 2013 .

[5]  Jordan B. Pollack,et al.  Towards Metrics and Visualizations Sensitive to Coevolutionary Failures , 2005, AAAI Fall Symposium: Coevolutionary and Coadaptive Systems.

[6]  Gregory Gutin,et al.  Paths , Trees and Cycles in Tournaments , 2003 .

[7]  R. Hemasinha An algorithm to generate tournament score sequences , 2003 .

[8]  D. Vere-Jones Markov Chains , 1972, Nature.

[9]  Kai Lai Chung,et al.  Markov Chains with Stationary Transition Probabilities , 1961 .

[10]  Kenneth O. Stanley and Joseph Reisinger and Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  The Dominance Tournament Method of Monitoring Progress in Coevolution , 2002 .

[11]  Charles M. Grinstead,et al.  Introduction to probability , 1999, Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences.

[12]  Siang Yew Chong,et al.  Improving Generalization Performance in Co-Evolutionary Learning , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[13]  Edwin D. de Jong,et al.  Ideal Evaluation from Coevolution , 2004, Evolutionary Computation.

[14]  R. Brualdi Spectra of digraphs , 2010 .

[15]  Marius Iosifescu,et al.  Finite Markov Processes and Their Applications , 1981 .

[16]  Simon M. Lucas,et al.  Coevolving Game-Playing Agents: Measuring Performance and Intransitivities , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[17]  Ida G. Sprinkhuizen-Kuyper,et al.  Cyclic Incrementality in Competitive Coevolution: Evolvability through Pseudo-Baldwinian Switching-Genes , 2016, Artificial Life.

[18]  Richard L. Tweedie,et al.  Markov Chains and Stochastic Stability , 1993, Communications and Control Engineering Series.

[19]  Edwin D. de Jong,et al.  A Monotonic Archive for Pareto-Coevolution , 2007, Evolutionary Computation.

[20]  Peter Tiño,et al.  Complex Coevolutionary Dynamics—Structural Stability and Finite Population Effects , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[21]  Dave Cliff,et al.  Tracking the Red Queen: Measurements of Adaptive Progress in Co-Evolutionary Simulations , 1995, ECAL.

[22]  Günter Rudolph,et al.  Multiobjective optimization for interwoven systems , 2017 .

[23]  Simon M. Lucas,et al.  Coevolution versus self-play temporal difference learning for acquiring position evaluation in small-board go , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[24]  D. Floreano,et al.  Adaptive Behavior in Competing Co-Evolving Species , 2000 .

[25]  Gregory Gutin,et al.  Digraphs - theory, algorithms and applications , 2002 .

[26]  J. Moon AN EXTENSION OF LANDAU'S THEOREM ON TOURNAMENTS , 1963 .

[27]  Seth Bullock,et al.  Combating Coevolutionary Disengagement by Reducing Parasite Virulence , 2004, Evolutionary Computation.

[28]  W. Daniel Hillis,et al.  Co-evolving parasites improve simulated evolution as an optimization procedure , 1990 .

[29]  Carl D. Meyer,et al.  Matrix Analysis and Applied Linear Algebra , 2000 .

[30]  Xin Yao,et al.  Speciation as automatic categorical modularization , 1997, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[31]  Score Structure in Digraphs , 2022 .

[32]  Richard K. Belew,et al.  New Methods for Competitive Coevolution , 1997, Evolutionary Computation.

[33]  Peter Tiño,et al.  Degree distribution and scaling in the Connecting Nearest Neighbors model , 2012, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[34]  Xin Yao,et al.  Towards an analytic framework for analysing the computation time of evolutionary algorithms , 2003, Artif. Intell..