Analysis of an Asymmetric Mutation Operator

Evolutionary algorithms are general randomized search heuristics and typically perform an unbiased random search that is guided only by the fitness of the search points encountered. However, in applications there is often problem-specific knowledge that suggests some additional bias. The use of appropriately biased variation operators may speed up the search considerably. Problems defined over bit strings of finite length often have the property that good solutions have only very few 1-bits or very few 0-bits. A mutation operator tailored toward such situations is studied under different perspectives and in a rigorous way discussing its assets and drawbacks. We consider the runtime of evolutionary algorithms using biased mutations on illustrative example functions as well as on function classes. A comparison with unbiased operators shows on which functions biased mutations lead to a speedup, on which functions biased mutations increase the runtime, and in which settings there is almost no difference in performance. The main focus is on theoretical runtime analysis yielding asymptotic results. These findings are accompanied by the results of empirical investigations that deliver additional insights.

[1]  Thomas Jansen,et al.  On the analysis of the (1+1) evolutionary algorithm , 2002, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[2]  Rajeev Motwani,et al.  Randomized Algorithms , 1995, SIGA.

[3]  Frank Neumann,et al.  Do additional objectives make a problem harder? , 2007, GECCO '07.

[4]  Frank Neumann,et al.  Speeding Up Evolutionary Algorithms through Asymmetric Mutation Operators , 2007, Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Bryant A. Julstrom,et al.  Biased mutation operators for subgraph-selection problems , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[6]  C. Scheideler Probabilistic Methods for Coordination Problems , 2000 .

[7]  Victor J. Rayward-Smith,et al.  Fitness Distance Correlation and Ridge Functions , 1998, PPSN.

[8]  Thomas Jansen,et al.  UNIVERSITY OF DORTMUND REIHE COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH CENTER 531 Design and Management of Complex Technical Processes and Systems by means of Computational Intelligence Methods Upper and Lower Bounds for Randomized Search Heuristics in Black-Box Optimization , 2004 .

[9]  John Odentrantz,et al.  Markov Chains: Gibbs Fields, Monte Carlo Simulation, and Queues , 2000, Technometrics.

[10]  Kenneth A. De Jong,et al.  Design and Management of Complex Technical Processes and Systems by Means of Computational Intelligence Methods on the Choice of the Offspring Population Size in Evolutionary Algorithms on the Choice of the Offspring Population Size in Evolutionary Algorithms , 2004 .

[11]  Xin Yao,et al.  A study of drift analysis for estimating computation time of evolutionary algorithms , 2004, Natural Computing.

[12]  Marc Toussaint,et al.  A No-Free-Lunch Theorem for Non-Uniform Distributions of Target Functions , 2004 .

[13]  Stefan Droste,et al.  On the design of problem-specific evolutionary algorithms , 2003 .

[14]  Thomas Jansen,et al.  Design and Management of Complex Technical Processes and Systems by means of Computational Intelligence Methods Evolutionary Algorithms-How to Cope With Plateaus of Constant Fitness and When to Reject Strings of the Same Fitness , 2001 .

[15]  Marc Schoenauer,et al.  Rigorous Hitting Times for Binary Mutations , 1999, Evolutionary Computation.

[16]  Xin Yao,et al.  Time complexity of evolutionary algorithms for combinatorial optimization: A decade of results , 2007, Int. J. Autom. Comput..

[17]  Ingo Wegener,et al.  Randomized local search, evolutionary algorithms, and the minimum spanning tree problem , 2004, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[18]  L. D. Whitley,et al.  The No Free Lunch and problem description length , 2001 .

[19]  R. K. Shyamasundar,et al.  Introduction to algorithms , 1996 .

[20]  Thomas Jansen,et al.  A New Framework for the Valuation of Algorithms for Black-Box Optimization , 2002, FOGA.

[21]  Thomas Jansen,et al.  UNIVERSITY OF DORTMUND REIHE COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH CENTER 531 Design and Management of Complex Technical Processes and Systems by means of Computational Intelligence Methods Design and Analysis of an Asymmetric Mutation Operator , 2005 .

[22]  Benjamin Doerr,et al.  Adjacency list matchings: an ideal genotype for cycle covers , 2007, GECCO '07.

[23]  David H. Wolpert,et al.  No free lunch theorems for optimization , 1997, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..