Adaptive artificial datasets through learning classifier systems for classification tasks

In producing an artificial dataset, humans usually play a major role in creating and controlling the problem domain. In particular, humans set up and tune the problem’s difficulty. If humans can set up the difficulty levels appropriately, then learning systems can solve classification tasks successfully. This paper introduces an autonomous classification problem generation approach. The problem’s difficulty is adapted based on the classification agent’s performance within the defined attributes. An automated problem generator has been created to evolve simulated datasets whilst the classification agent, in this case a learning classifier system (LCS), attempts to learn the evolving datasets. The idea here is to tune the problem’s difficulty autonomously such that the problem’s characteristics may be determined effectively. Furthermore, this framework can empirically test the learning bounds of the classification agent whilst lowering human involvement. Initially, tabu search was integrated in the problem generator to discover the best combination of domain features in order to adjust the problem’s difficulty. In order to overcome stagnation in local optimum, a Pittsburgh-style LCSs, A-PLUS, was adapted for the first time to the problem generator. In this way, the effect of the problem’s characteristics, e.g. noise, which alter the classification agent’s performance, becomes human readable. Experiments confirm that the problem generator was able to tune the problem’s difficulty either to make the problem ‘harder’ or ‘easier’ so that it can either ‘increase’ or ‘decrease’ the classification agent’s performance.

[1]  Paul D. Scott,et al.  Evaluating data mining procedures: techniques for generating artificial data sets , 1999, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[2]  John J. Grefenstette,et al.  A Coevolutionary Approach to Learning Sequential Decision Rules , 1995, ICGA.

[3]  Martin V. Butz Kernel-based, ellipsoidal conditions in the real-valued XCS classifier system , 2005, GECCO '05.

[4]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  Erratum to: Evolving hard problems: generating human genetics datasets with a complex etiology , 2016, BioData Mining.

[5]  Mike Preuss,et al.  Coevolution for classification , 2008 .

[6]  Francisco Azuaje,et al.  Reply to comments on 'A computational evolutionary approach to evolving game strategy and Cooperation' , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics).

[7]  Kenneth A. De Jong,et al.  Evaluating the XCS learning classifier system in competitive simultaneous learning environments , 2005, GECCO '05.

[8]  Núria Macià,et al.  Beyond Homemade Artificial Data Sets , 2009, HAIS.

[9]  Y. Hoshino,et al.  A Coevolutionary System for Development of Strategies in Poker Game , 2007, Second International Conference on Innovative Computing, Informatio and Control (ICICIC 2007).

[10]  S. Smith,et al.  A Learning System Based on Genetic Algorithms , 1980 .

[11]  Tin Kam Ho,et al.  Complexity Measures of Supervised Classification Problems , 2002, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[12]  Larry Bull,et al.  Revisiting genetic selection in the XCS learning classifier system , 2005, 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[13]  Núria Macià,et al.  Genetic-Based Synthetic Data Sets for the Analysis of Classifiers Behavior , 2008, 2008 Eighth International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems.

[14]  Tim Kovacs,et al.  Strength or Accuracy? Fitness Calculation in Learning Classifier Systems , 1999, Learning Classifier Systems.

[15]  Kenneth A. De Jong,et al.  Cooperative Coevolution: An Architecture for Evolving Coadapted Subcomponents , 2000, Evolutionary Computation.

[16]  Mengjie Zhang,et al.  XCSR with Computed Continuous Action , 2012, Australasian Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[17]  Jiadong Yang,et al.  Effective search for Pittsburgh learning classifier systems via estimation of distribution algorithms , 2012, Inf. Sci..

[18]  Ester Bernadó-Mansilla,et al.  Genetic-based machine learning systems are competitive for pattern recognition , 2008, Evol. Intell..

[19]  Jason H. Moore,et al.  Learning classifier systems: a complete introduction, review, and roadmap , 2009 .

[20]  Clare Bates Congdon,et al.  A comparison of genetic algorithms and other machine learning systems on a complex classification task from common disease research , 1995 .

[21]  Mengjie Zhang,et al.  Two-cornered learning classifier systems for pattern generation and classification , 2012, GECCO '12.

[22]  Martin V. Butz,et al.  Rule-Based Evolutionary Online Learning Systems - A Principled Approach to LCS Analysis and Design , 2006, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing.

[23]  Dr. Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  How to Solve It: Modern Heuristics , 2004 .

[24]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[25]  K.A. De Jong,et al.  Analyzing cooperative coevolution with evolutionary game theory , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC'02 (Cat. No.02TH8600).

[26]  Olgierd Unold,et al.  Self-adaptation of parameters in a learning classifier system ensemble machine , 2010, Int. J. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci..

[27]  Nasser M. Nasrabadi,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning , 2006, Technometrics.

[28]  Hua Xu,et al.  A cooperative coevolution-based pittsburgh learning classifier system embedded with memetic feature selection , 2011, 2011 IEEE Congress of Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[29]  Kenneth A. De Jong,et al.  A Cooperative Coevolutionary Approach to Function Optimization , 1994, PPSN.

[30]  Stewart W. Wilson Classifier Fitness Based on Accuracy , 1995, Evolutionary Computation.

[31]  Martin V. Butz,et al.  Data Mining in Learning Classifier Systems: Comparing XCS with GAssist , 2005, IWLCS.

[32]  Stewart W. Wilson Get Real! XCS with Continuous-Valued Inputs , 1999, Learning Classifier Systems.

[33]  Chung-Yuan Huang,et al.  Parameter Adaptation within Co-adaptive Learning Classifier Systems , 2004, GECCO.

[34]  Majid Nili Ahmadabadi,et al.  Interaction of Culture-based Learning and Cooperative Co-evolution and its Application to Automatic Behavior-based System Design , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[35]  Ester Bernadó-Mansilla,et al.  Accuracy-Based Learning Classifier Systems: Models, Analysis and Applications to Classification Tasks , 2003, Evolutionary Computation.

[36]  Xavier Llorà,et al.  Coevolving Different Knowledge Representations With Fine-grained Parallel Learning Classifier Systems , 2002, GECCO.

[37]  Olgierd Unold,et al.  Self-Adaptive Learning Classifier System , 2010, J. Circuits Syst. Comput..

[38]  Jaume Bacardit Peñarroya Pittsburgh genetic-based machine learning in the data mining era: representations, generalization, and run-time , 2004 .

[39]  G. McLachlan,et al.  Pattern Classification: A Unified View of Statistical and Neural Approaches. , 1998 .

[40]  James A. Foster,et al.  Co-evolving Faults to Improve the Fault Tolerance of Sorting Networks , 2004, EuroGP.

[41]  Pier Luca Lanzi,et al.  A Roadmap to the Last Decade of Learning Classifier System Research , 1999, Learning Classifier Systems.

[42]  Stewart W. Wilson,et al.  Noname manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Learning Classifier Systems: A Survey , 2022 .

[43]  Michael Kirley,et al.  CoXCS: A Coevolutionary Learning Classifier Based on Feature Space Partitioning , 2009, Australasian Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[44]  Tim Kovacs Rule Fitness and Pathology in Learning Classifier Systems , 2004, Evolutionary Computation.