Encouraging creative thinking in robots improves their ability to solve challenging problems

Evolutionary algorithms frequently get stuck on local optima--and fail to find the global optimum--when local gradients do not point the search process toward the direction of the global optimum. A recent breakthrough called Novelty Search ameliorates this problem by enabling the search process to explore in every direction by encouraging the production of novel, or not-yet-seen, phenotypes (e.g. new robot behaviors). However, a problem with Novelty Search is that it can get lost on "novelty plateaus" wherein novel behaviors in offspring are not immediately produced by mutation and crossover (e.g. when a sequence of specific mutations is required to produce new behaviors, but the intermediate mutations are not rewarded because they do not produce novel behaviors). In such cases, Novelty Search and related approaches that reward behavioral diversity can get stuck. Here we introduce a new approach, borrowed from human psychology, that mitigates this problem: encouraging creative thinking. In addition to rewarding novel behavior, we encourage evolving neural networks to "think differently" by rewarding not-yet-seen firing patterns in hidden neurons, which we call the "Creative Thinking Approach." We hypothesize that encouraging novel thinking can reward stepping stones toward new behaviors. On a variety of challenging robotic control problems from previous publications we demonstrate that, as problem difficulty increases, adding the Creative Thinking Approach increasingly improves performance over simply encouraging novel behaviors. Our results suggest that the Creative Thinking Approach could help improve the scale and complexity of problems that can be solved by evolutionary algorithms.

[1]  T. Rickards Creativity and problem solving at work , 1990 .

[2]  J. Elman Learning and development in neural networks: the importance of starting small , 1993, Cognition.

[3]  Conor Ryan,et al.  Reducing Premature Convergence in Evolutionary Algorithms , 1996 .

[4]  Adam Prügel-Bennett,et al.  Genetic drift in genetic algorithm selection schemes , 1999, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[5]  Erkki Oja,et al.  Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications , 2000, Neural Networks.

[6]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Evolutionary Computation 1 , 2018 .

[7]  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 .

[8]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[9]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Evolving Neural Networks through Augmenting Topologies , 2002, Evolutionary Computation.

[10]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  A Taxonomy for Artificial Embryogeny , 2003, Artificial Life.

[11]  Christopher M. Bishop,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Information Science and Statistics) , 2006 .

[12]  C. A. Coello Coello,et al.  Evolutionary multi-objective optimization: a historical view of the field , 2006, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine.

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

[14]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Exploiting Open-Endedness to Solve Problems Through the Search for Novelty , 2008, ALIFE.

[15]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  A Hypercube-Based Encoding for Evolving Large-Scale Neural Networks , 2009, Artificial Life.

[16]  Stéphane Doncieux,et al.  Overcoming the bootstrap problem in evolutionary robotics using behavioral diversity , 2009, 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[17]  Heng Tao Shen,et al.  Principal Component Analysis , 2009, Encyclopedia of Biometrics.

[18]  E. Nicoara,et al.  Mechanisms to Avoid the Premature Convergence of Genetic Algorithms , 2009 .

[19]  Anthony Kulis,et al.  Bio-Inspired Artificial Intelligence: Theories, Methods, and Technologies , 2009, Scalable Comput. Pract. Exp..

[20]  R. K. Ursem Multi-objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms , 2009 .

[21]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Autonomous Evolution of Topographic Regularities in Artificial Neural Networks , 2010, Neural Computation.

[22]  Stéphane Doncieux,et al.  Sferesv2: Evolvin' in the multi-core world , 2010, IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[23]  Stéphane Doncieux,et al.  Behavioral diversity measures for Evolutionary Robotics , 2010, IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[24]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Abandoning Objectives: Evolution Through the Search for Novelty Alone , 2011, Evolutionary Computation.

[25]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  On the Performance of Indirect Encoding Across the Continuum of Regularity , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[26]  Kevin P. Murphy,et al.  Machine learning - a probabilistic perspective , 2012, Adaptive computation and machine learning series.

[27]  Stéphane Doncieux,et al.  With a little help from selection pressures: evolution of memory in robot controllers , 2012, ALIFE.

[28]  Stéphane Doncieux,et al.  Encouraging Behavioral Diversity in Evolutionary Robotics: An Empirical Study , 2012, Evolutionary Computation.

[29]  Joel Lehman,et al.  Rewarding Reactivity to Evolve Robust Controllers without Multiple Trials or Noise , 2012, ALIFE.