Genetic programming: profiling reasonable parameter value windows with varying problem difficulty

Genetic Programming (GP) algorithms benefit from careful consideration of parameter values, especially for complex problems. We submit that determining the optimal parameter value is not as important as finding a window of reasonable parameter values. We test seven problems to determine if windows of reasonable parameter values for mutation rates and population size exist. The results show narrowing, expanding and static windows of effective mutation rates dependent upon the problem type. The results for varying population sizes show that less complex problems use more resources per solution with increasing population size. Conversely as the problem difficulty increases we see either no significant change in solution effort as population size increases, indicating constant efficiency or in some cases we discover decreasing solution effort with larger population sizes. This suggests that in general as the instances of a problem increase in difficulty increasing the population size will either have no effect on efficiency or, for some problems, will lead to relatively small increases in efficiency.

[1]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  Optimization via Parameter Mapping with Genetic Programming , 2004, PPSN.

[2]  John R. Koza,et al.  Genetic programming 2 - automatic discovery of reusable programs , 1994, Complex Adaptive Systems.

[3]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Parameter Control in Evolutionary Algorithms , 2007, Parameter Setting in Evolutionary Algorithms.

[4]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Population Sizing for Genetic Programming Based Upon Decision Making , 2005, ArXiv.

[5]  Alan Piszcz,et al.  Genetic programming: parametric analysis of structure altering mutation techniques , 2005, GECCO '05.

[6]  W. Langdon,et al.  Smooth uniform crossover, sub-machine code GP and demes: a recipe for solving high-order Boolean parity problems , 1999 .

[7]  Jason M. Daida,et al.  Towards identifying populations that increase the likelihood of success in genetic programming , 2005, GECCO '05.

[8]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  Solving High-Order Boolean Parity Problems with Smooth Uniform Crossover, Sub-Machine Code GP and Demes , 2000, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[9]  K. Chellapilla,et al.  Investigating the influence of depth and degree of genotypic change on fitness in genetic programming , 1999 .

[10]  Wolfgang Banzhaf,et al.  Adaption of Operator Probabilities in Genetic Programming , 2001, EuroGP.

[11]  Alan Piszcz,et al.  Genetic Programming: Analysis of Optimal Mutation Rates in a Problem with Varying Difficulty , 2006, FLAIRS.

[12]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Parameter control in evolutionary algorithms , 1999, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[13]  A survey of mutation techniques in genetic programming , 2006, GECCO '06.

[14]  Alan Piszcz,et al.  Genetic programming: optimal population sizes for varying complexity problems , 2006, GECCO '06.

[15]  Jason M. Daida,et al.  Parameter sweeps for exploring GP parameters , 2005, GECCO '05.

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

[17]  John R. Koza,et al.  Genetic Programming III: Darwinian Invention & Problem Solving , 1999 .

[18]  John R. Koza,et al.  Genetic Programming IV: Routine Human-Competitive Machine Intelligence , 2003 .