Hyper-Heuristics: A Study On Increasing Primitive-Space

Practitioners often need to solve real world problems for which no custom search algorithms exist. In these cases they tend to use general-purpose solvers that have no guarantee to perform well on their specific problem. The relatively new field of hyper-heuristics provides an alternative to the potential pit-falls of general-purpose solvers, by allowing practitioners to generate a custom algorithm optimized for their problem of interest. Hyper-heuristics are meta-heuristics operating on algorithm space employing targeted primitives to compose algorithms. This paper explores the advantages and disadvantages of expanding a hyper-heuristic's primitive-space with additional primitives. This should allow for an increase in quality of evolved algorithms. However, increasing the search space of a meta-heuristic almost always results in longer time to convergence and lower quality results for the same amount of computational time, but also all too often lower quality results at convergence, potentially making a problem impractical to solve for a practitioner. This paper explores the scalability of hyper-heuristics as the primitive-space is increased, demonstrating significantly increased quality solutions at convergence with a corresponding increase in convergence time. Additionally, this paper explores the impact that the nature of the added primitives have on the performance of the hyper-heuristic.

[1]  Patrick De Causmaecker,et al.  The Effect of the Set of Low-Level Heuristics on the Performance of Selection Hyper-heuristics , 2012, PPSN.

[2]  Mihai Oltean,et al.  Evolutionary design of Evolutionary Algorithms , 2009, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[3]  Graham Kendall,et al.  Exploring Hyper-heuristic Methodologies with Genetic Programming , 2009 .

[4]  Nuno Lourenço,et al.  The importance of the learning conditions in hyper-heuristics , 2013, GECCO '13.

[5]  Mihai Oltean,et al.  Evolving Evolutionary Algorithms Using Multi Expression Programming , 2003, ECAL.

[6]  Graham Kendall,et al.  Choice function based hyper-heuristics for multi-objective optimization , 2015, Appl. Soft Comput..

[7]  Daniel R. Tauritz,et al.  Evolving black-box search algorithms employing genetic programming , 2013, GECCO.

[8]  Daniel R. Tauritz,et al.  Supportive coevolution , 2012, GECCO '12.

[9]  E. D. Weinberger,et al.  The NK model of rugged fitness landscapes and its application to maturation of the immune response. , 1989, Journal of theoretical biology.

[10]  A. E. Eiben,et al.  Comparing parameter tuning methods for evolutionary algorithms , 2009, 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[11]  Mihai Oltean,et al.  Evolving evolutionary algorithms using evolutionary algorithms , 2007, GECCO '07.

[12]  Mihai Oltean,et al.  Evolving Evolutionary Algorithms Using Linear Genetic Programming , 2005, Evolutionary Computation.

[13]  Peter I. Cowling,et al.  An empirical study of hyperheuristics for managing very large sets of low level heuristics , 2012, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[14]  Daniel R. Tauritz,et al.  Asynchronous Parallel Evolutionary Algorithms: Leveraging Heterogeneous Fitness Evaluation Times for Scalability and Elitist Parsimony Pressure , 2015, GECCO.

[15]  Daniel R. Tauritz,et al.  Multi-sample evolution of robust black-box search algorithms , 2014, GECCO.

[16]  Sanja Petrovic,et al.  Unified encoding for hyper-heuristics with application to bioinformatics , 2014, Central Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[17]  Daniel R. Tauritz,et al.  A problem configuration study of the robustness of a black-box search algorithm hyper-heuristic , 2014, GECCO.

[18]  Edmund K. Burke,et al.  Effective learning hyper-heuristics for the course timetabling problem , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[19]  Nuno Lourenço,et al.  Evolving evolutionary algorithms , 2012, GECCO '12.

[20]  A. E. Eiben,et al.  Diagonal Crossover in Genetic Algorithms for Numerical Optimization , 1997 .