On the Bias and Performance of the Edge-Set Encoding

The edge-set encoding of trees directly represents trees as sets of their edges. Nonheuristic operators for edge-sets manipulate trees' edges without regard for their weights, while heuristic operators consider edges' weights when including or excluding them. In the latter case, the operators generally favor edges with lower weights, and they tend to generate trees that resemble minimum spanning trees. This bias is strong, which suggests that evolutionary algorithms (EAs) that employ heuristic operators will succeed when optimum solutions resemble minimum spanning trees (MSTs) but fail otherwise. The one-max tree problem is a scalable test problem for trees where the optimum solution can be predefined. Heuristic operators for edge-sets fail when optimum solutions are random trees or stars. Similarly, for the optimal communication spanning tree (OCST) problem, heuristic operators are efficient only for problem instances where optimal solutions are slightly different from MSTs. In contrast, for both problems the performance of nonheuristic operators is approximately independent of the type of the optimal solution. Therefore, heuristic operators for edge-sets should be used only if optimal solutions closely resemble MSTs. If optimal solutions have low or no bias towards MSTs, heuristic operators for edge-sets fail, and nonheuristic operators should be preferred.

[1]  G. Raidl,et al.  Prüfer numbers: a poor representation of spanning trees for evolutionary search , 2001 .

[2]  Yu Li,et al.  A New Genetic Algorithm for the Optimal Communication Spanning Tree Problem , 1999, Artificial Evolution.

[3]  Satish Rao,et al.  A tight bound on approximating arbitrary metrics by tree metrics , 2003, STOC '03.

[4]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Network Random KeysA Tree Representation Scheme for Genetic and Evolutionary Algorithms , 2002, Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Yu Li,et al.  An Effective Implementation of a Direct Spanning Tree Representation in GAs , 2001, EvoWorkshops.

[6]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  The Edge-Set Encoding Revisited: On the Bias of a Direct Representation for Trees , 2004, GECCO.

[7]  Mitsuo Gen,et al.  Genetic algorithm for solving bicriteria network topology design problem , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation-CEC99 (Cat. No. 99TH8406).

[8]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Representations for genetic and evolutionary algorithms (2. ed.) , 2006 .

[9]  E. H. Neville,et al.  The codifying of tree-structure , 1953, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[10]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Network random keys-a tree network representation scheme for genetic and evolutionary algorithms , 2000 .

[11]  Mihalis Yannakakis,et al.  Optimization, approximation, and complexity classes , 1991, STOC '88.

[12]  T. C. Hu,et al.  Multi-Terminal Network Flows , 1961 .

[13]  Saverio Caminiti,et al.  A Unified Approach to Coding Labeled Trees , 2004, LATIN.

[14]  Noga Alon,et al.  A Graph-Theoretic Game and Its Application to the k-Server Problem , 1995, SIAM J. Comput..

[15]  Andreas T. Ernst,et al.  Comparison of Algorithms for the Degree Constrained Minimum Spanning Tree , 2001, J. Heuristics.

[16]  David Peleg,et al.  Deterministic Polylog Approximation for Minimum Communication Spanning Trees , 1998, ICALP.

[17]  Jan Karel Lenstra,et al.  The complexity of the network design problem , 1978, Networks.

[18]  Chao-Hsien Chu,et al.  Genetic algorithms for communications network design - an empirical study of the factors that influence performance , 2001, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[19]  Chuan Yi Tang,et al.  A polynomial time approximation scheme for minimum routing cost spanning trees , 1998, SODA '98.

[20]  Samir Khuller,et al.  A Network-Flow Technique for Finding Low-Weight Bounded-Degree Spanning Trees , 1996, J. Algorithms.

[21]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Parallel Recombinative Simulated Annealing: A Genetic Algorithm , 1995, Parallel Comput..

[22]  Yair Bartal,et al.  On approximating arbitrary metrices by tree metrics , 1998, STOC '98.

[23]  A. Cayley A theorem on trees , 2009 .

[24]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  On the Optimal Communication Spanning Tree Problem , 2003 .

[25]  T. C. Hu Optimum Communication Spanning Trees , 1974, SIAM J. Comput..

[26]  Eilon Reshef Approximating Minimum Communication Cost Spanning Trees and Related Problems , 1999 .

[27]  Bryant A. Julstrom,et al.  A weighted coding in a genetic algorithm for the degree-constrained minimum spanning tree problem , 2000, SAC '00.

[28]  Richard T. Wong,et al.  Worst-Case Analysis of Network Design Problem Heuristics , 1980, SIAM J. Algebraic Discret. Methods.

[29]  Narsingh Deo Prüfer-Like Codes for Labeled Trees , 2001 .

[30]  Emile H. L. Aarts,et al.  Simulated Annealing: Theory and Applications , 1987, Mathematics and Its Applications.

[31]  Charles C. Palmer,et al.  An approach to a problem in network design using genetic algorithms , 1994, Networks.

[32]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Representations for genetic and evolutionary algorithms , 2002, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing.

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

[34]  David K. Smith,et al.  The Dandelion Code: A New Coding of Spanning Trees for Genetic Algorithms , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[35]  D. Goldberg,et al.  Tree network design with genetic algorithms an investigation in the locality of the pruefernumber en , 1999 .

[36]  E. Cantu-Paz,et al.  The Gambler's Ruin Problem, Genetic Algorithms, and the Sizing of Populations , 1997, Evolutionary Computation.

[37]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[38]  David K. Smith,et al.  From the Dandelion Code to the Rainbow code: a class of bijective spanning tree representations with linear complexity and bounded locality , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[39]  David Peleg Approximating Minimum Communication Spanning Trees , 1997, SIROCCO.

[40]  Charles C. Palmer,et al.  Representing trees in genetic algorithms , 1994, Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence.

[41]  Bryant A. Julstrom,et al.  Edge sets: an effective evolutionary coding of spanning trees , 2003, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[42]  Saverio Caminiti,et al.  String Coding of Trees with Locality and Heritability , 2005, COCOON.

[43]  flerman Mawengkang OPTIMIZATION MODELS FOR COMMUNICATION NETWORK DESIGN , .

[44]  Sudipto Guha,et al.  Approximating a finite metric by a small number of tree metrics , 1998, Proceedings 39th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No.98CB36280).

[45]  Subhash C. Narula,et al.  Degree-constrained minimum spanning tree , 1980, Comput. Oper. Res..

[46]  Roger L. Wainwright,et al.  Determinant Factorization: A New Encoding Scheme for Spanning Trees Applied to the Probabilistic Minimum Spanning Tree Problem , 1995, ICGA.

[47]  Lawrence Davis,et al.  A Genetic Algorithm for Survivable Network Design , 1993, International Conference on Genetic Algorithms.

[48]  Franz Rothlauf,et al.  Redundant Representations in Evolutionary Computation , 2003, Evolutionary Computation.

[49]  M. C. Sinclair,et al.  Minimum Cost Topology Optimisation of the Cost 239 European Optical Network , 1995, ICANNGA.

[50]  Bryant A. Julstrom,et al.  Weight-biased edge-crossover in evolutionary algorithms for two graph problems , 2001, SAC.

[51]  Kenneth Steiglitz,et al.  Combinatorial Optimization: Algorithms and Complexity , 1981 .

[52]  Günther R. Raidl,et al.  Empirical Analysis of Locality, Heritability and Heuristic Bias in Evolutionary Algorithms: A Case Study for the Multidimensional Knapsack Problem , 2005, Evolutionary Computation.