Reducing the number of fitness evaluations in graph genetic programming using a canonical graph indexed database

Evolutionary Computation

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 199-221

  Niehaus, Jens ^a   Igel, Christian ^b   Banzhaf, Wolfgang ^c  

^a Visual Systems Automation GmbH   (Germany)

^b RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

^c MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND   (Canada)

Author keywords

Fitness database; Genetic programming; Graph isomorphism; Graph representation; Neutrality

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; COMPUTER PROGRAM; EVOLUTION; GENETIC DATABASE; PHENOTYPE;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; DATABASES, GENETIC; EVOLUTION; MODELS, GENETIC; PHENOTYPE; SOFTWARE;

EID: 34447508234     PISSN: 10636560     EISSN: 15309304     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/evco.2007.15.2.199     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Banzhaf, W., P. Nordin, R. E. Keller, and F. D. Francone (1998). Genetic Programming -An Introduction. Morgan Kaufmann.
2. Bruce, W. S. (1997). The lawnmower problem revisited: Stack-based genetic programming and automatically defined functions. In J. R. Koza (Ed.), Genetic Programming 1997: Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference, pp. 52-57. Morgan Kaufmann.
3. Buss, S. (1997). Alogtime algorithms for tree isomorphism, comparison, and canonization. In Computational Logic and Proof Theory, 5th Kurt Gödel Colloquium '97, Volume 1289 of LNCS, pp. 18-33. Springer-Verlag.
4. Chellapilla, K. (1997). Evolutionary programming with tree mutations: Evolving computer programs without crossover. In J. R. Koza (Ed.), Genetic Programming 1997: Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference, pp. 431-438. Morgan Kaufmann.
5. Chickering, D. M. (2002). Learning equivalence classes of Bayesian-network structures. Journal of Machine Learning Research 2, 445-498.
6. Christensen, S. and F. Oppacher (2002). An analysis of Kozas computational effort statistic for genetic programming. In J. A. Foster, E. Lutton, J. Miller, C. Ryan, and A. G. B. Tettamanzi (Eds.), Genetic Programming: 5th European Conference (EuroGP 2002), Volume 2278 of LNCS, pp. 182-191. Springer-Verlag.
7. Conrad, M. (1990). The geometry of evolution. Biosystems 24, 61-81.
8. Cramer, N. L. (1985). A representation for the adaptive generation of simple sequential programs. In J. J. Grefenstette (Ed.), Proceedings of an International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and their Application, pp. 183-187. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. D'haeseleer, P. and J. Bluming (1994). Effects of locality in individual and population evolution. In K. E. Kinnear jr. (Ed.), Advances in Genetic Programming. MIT Press.
10. Ebner, M. (1999). On the search space of genetic programming and its relation to nature's search space. In In IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation 1999 (CEC 1999), pp. 1357-1361. IEEE Press.
11. Ebner, M., M. Shackleton, and R. Shipman (2001). How neutral networks influence evolvability. Complexity 7(2), 19-33.
12. Fogel, L. J., A. J. Owens, and M. J. Walsh (1966). Artificial Intelligence through Simulated Evolution. John Wiley & Sons.
13. Friedrich, C. M. and C. Moraga (1996). An evolutionary method to find good building-blocks for architectures of artificial neural networks. In Sixth International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge Based Systems (IPMU'96), Volume 2, pp. 951-956.
14. Garey, M. R. and D. S. Johnson (1979). Computers and Intractability, A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
15. Gruau, F. (1995). Automatic definition of modular neural networks. Adaptive Behavior 3(2), 151-183.
16. Heywood, M. I. and A. N. Zincir-Heywood (2002). Dynamic page based crossover in linear genetic programming. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Part B 32(3), 380-388.
17. Hopcroft, J. and R. Tarjan (1974). Efficient planarity testing. Journal of the ACM 21(4), 549-568.
18. Huynen, M. A. (1996). Exploring phenotype space through neutral evolution. Journal of Molecular Evolution 43, 165-169.
19. Igel, C. and P. Stagge (2002a). Effects of phenotypic redundancy in structure optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 6(1), 74-85.
20. Igel, C. and P. Stagge (2002b). Graph isomorphisms affect structure optimization of neural networks. In International Joint Conference on Neural Networks 2002 (IJCNN), pp. 142-147. IEEE Press.
21. Igel, C. and M. Toussaint (2003). Neutrality and self-adaptation. Natural Computing 2(2), 117-13.
22. Kantschik, W. and W Banzhaf (2002). Lineargraph GP - a new GP structure. In E. Lutton, J. Foster, J. Miller, C. Ryan, and A. Tettamanzi (Eds.), Genetic Programming, Proceedings of 5th EuroGP, Volume 2278 of LNCS, pp. 83-92. Springer.
23. Kimura, M. (1968). Evolutionary rate at the molecular level. Nature 217, 624-626.
24. Köbler, J. (2006). On graph isomorphism for restricted graph classes. In A. Beckmann, U. Berger, B. Löwe, and J. V. Tucker (Eds.), Logical Approaches to Computational Barriers, Second Conference on Computability in Europe, CiE 2006, Volume 3988 of LNCS, pp. 241-256. Springer-Verlag.
25. Koza, J. R. (1992). Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Natural Selection. MIT Press.
26. Koza, J. R. (1994). Genetic Programming II: Automatic Discovery of Reusable Programs. MIT Press.
27. Koza, J. R., F. H. Bennett III, D. Andre, and M. A. Keane (1999). Genetic Programming III: Darwinian Invention and Problem Solving. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
28. Kuscu, I. (1998). Artificial ant problem revisited. In V. W. Porto (Ed.), Seventh Annual Conference on Evolutionary Programming, Volume 1447 of LNCS, pp. 799-808. Springer-Verlag.
29. Langdon, W. B. (1998). Better trained ants. In R. Poli (Ed.), Late Breaking Papers at EuroGP'98: The First European Workshop on Genetic Programming, pp. 11-13. The University of Birmingham.
30. Langdon, W. B. and R. Poli (1998). Why ants are hard. In J. R. Koza (Ed.), Genetic Programming 1998: Procceedings of the Third Annual Conference, pp. 193-201. Morgan Kaufmann.
31. Lindell, S. (1992). A logspace algorithm for tree canonization. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 400-404. ACM Press.
32. Luke, S. and L. Panait (2002). Is the perfect the enemy of the good? In W. B. Langdon, E. Cantú-Paz, K. Mathias, R. Roy, D. Davis, R. Poli, K. Balakrishnan, V. Honavar, G. Rudolph, J. Wegener, L. Bull, M. A. Potter, A. C. Schultz, J. F. Miller, E. Burke, and N. Jonoska (Eds.), Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, GECCO 2002, pp. 820-828. Morgan Kaufmann.
33. Mahner, M. and M. Kary (1997). What exactly are genomes, genotypes and phenotypes? And what about phenomes? Journal of Theoretical Biology 186(1), 55-63.
34. McKay, B. D. (1981). Practical graph isomorphism. Congressus Numerantium 30, 47-87.
35. McKay, B. D. (1990). nauty user's guide (version 1.5). Technical Report TR-CS-90-02, Australian National University, Computer Science Department, Canberra, Australia.
36. Newman, M. E. J. and R. Engelhardt (1998). Effects of neutral selection on the evolution of molecular species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences 265(1403), 1333-1338.
37. Niehaus, J. (2003). Graphbasierte Genetische Programmierung. Dissertation, Chair of System Analysis, Computer Science Department, Dortmund University, Dortmund,Germany. http://de.scientificcommons.org/866201.
38. Niehaus, J. and W. Banzhaf (2001). Adaption of operator probabilities in genetic programming. In J. Miller, M. Tomassini, P. L. Lanzi, C. Ryan, A. G. B. Tettamanzi, and W. B. Langdon (Eds.), Genetic Programming: 4th European Conference (EuroGP 2001), Volume 2038 of LNCS, pp. 325-336. Spring-Verlag.
39. Niehaus, J. and W. Banzhaf (2003). More on computational effort statistic for genetic programming. In C. Ryan, T. Soule, M. Keijzer, E. P. K. Tsang, R. Poli, and E. Costa (Eds.), Genetic Programming: 6th European Conference (EuroGP 2003), Volume 2610 of LNCS, pp. 164-172. Springer-Verlag.
40. O'Neill, M., C. Ryan, M. Keijzer, and M. Cattolico (2003). Crossover in grammatical evolution. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 4(1), 67-93.
41. Poli, R. (1997). Evolution of graph-like programs with parallel distributed genetic programming. In T. Bäck (Ed.), Genetic Algorithms: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference, pp. 345-353. Morgan Kaufmann.
42. Schuster, P. (1996). Landscapes and molecular evolution. Physica D 107, 331-363.
43. Schuster, P. (2002). Molecular insights into evolution of phenotypes. In J. P. Crutchfield and P. Schuster (Eds.), Evolutionary Dynamics - Exploring the Interplay of Accident, Selection, Neutrality and Function, Santa Fe Institute Series in the Science of Complexity. Oxford University Press.
44. Spector, L. and S. Luke (1996). Cultural transmission of information in gp. In J. R. K. et.al (Ed.), Genetic Programming 1996: Proceedings of the First Annual Conference, pp. 209-214. MIT Press.
45. Stagge, P. and C. Igel (2000). Neural network structures and isomorphisms: Random walk characteristics of the search space. In X. Yao and D. B. Fogel (Eds.), 2000 IEEE Symposium on Combinations of Evolutionary Computation and Neural Networks (ECNN 2000), pp. 82-90. IEEE Press.
46. Stagge, P. and C. Igel (2001). Structure optimization and isomorphisms. In L. Kallel, B. Naudts, and A. Rogers (Eds.), Theoretical Aspects of Evolutionary Computing, Natural Computing series, pp. 409-422. Springer-Verlag.
47. Syswerda, G. (1991). A study of reproduction in generational and steady state genetic algorithms. In G. J. E. Rawlins (Ed.), Foundations of Genetic Algorithms (FOGA I), pp. 94-101. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
48. Teller, A. and M. Veloso (1995). Program evolution for data mining. The International Journal for Expert Systems 8(3), 216-236.
49. Terrio, M. D. and M. D. Heywood (2002). Directing crossover for reduction of bloat in gp. In Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE Canadian Conference on Electrical & Computer Engineering, pp. 1111-1115. IEEE Press.
50. Thierens, D. (1996). Non-redundant genetic coding of neural networks. In Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 571-575. IEEE Press.
51. Toussaint, M. (2003). On the evolution of phenotypic exploration distributions. In C. Cotta, K. De Jong, R. Poli, and J. Rowe (Eds.), Foundations of Genetic Algorithms 7 (FOGA VII), pp. 169-182. Morgan Kaufmann.
52. Toussaint, M. and C. Igel (2002). Neutrality: A necessity for self-adaptation. In In IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation 2002 (CEC 2002), pp. 1354-1359. IEEE Press.
53. Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 59, 433-46.
54. van Nimwegen, E., J. P. Crutchfield, and M. Huynen (1999). Neutral evolution of mutational robustness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96, 9716-9720.
55. Whitley, L. D. (1989). The GENITOR algorithm and selection pressure: Why rank-based allocation of reproductive trials is best. In J. D. Schaffer (Ed.), Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Genetic Algorithms (ICGA'89), Jul 4-7, pp. 116-121. George Mason University: Morgan Kaufmann.
56. Wilke, C. O. (2001). Adaptive evolution on neutral networks. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 63(4), 715-730.