Let's get ready to rumble redux: Crossover versus mutation head to head on exponentially scaled problems

Proceedings of GECCO 2007: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 1380-1387

  Sastry, Kumara ^a   Goldberg, David E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Building blocks; Convergence time; Crossover; Domino convergence; Drift time; Efficiency enhancement; Exponential scaling; Genetic algorithms; Mutation; Noisy fitness functions; Population sizing; Salience; Scalability analysis; Scaling; Speedup

Indexed keywords

CONVERGENCE OF NUMERICAL METHODS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBLEM SOLVING; RANDOM PROCESSES; TABU SEARCH;

BUILDING BLOCKS; CONVERGENCE TIME; DOMINO CONVERGENCE; DRIFT TIME; EFFICIENCY ENHANCEMENT; EXPONENTIAL SCALING; MUTATION; NOISY FITNESS FUNCTIONS; POPULATION SIZING; SCALABILITY ANALYSIS;

GENETIC ALGORITHMS;

EID: 34548099760     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1276958.1277215     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (41)

1. H. Asoh and H. Mühlenbein. On the mean convergence time of evolutionary algorithms without selection and mutation. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, 3:98-107, 1994.
2. E. B. Baum, D. Boneh, and C. Garrett. Where genetic algorithms excel? Evolutionary Computation, 9(1):93-124, 2001.
3. M. G. Bulmer. The Mathematical Theory of Quantitative Genetics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1985.
4. E. Cantú-Paz. Efficient and accurate parallel genetic algorithms. Kluwer Academic Pub, Boston, MA, 2000.
5. E. Cantú-Paz and D. E. Goldberg. Are multiple runs of genetic algorithms better than one? Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 801-812, 2003.
6. B. W. Colletti and J. W. Barnes. Using group theory to construct and characterize metaheuristic search neighborhoods. In C. Rego and B. Alidaee, editors, Adaptive Memory and Evolution: Tabu Search and Scatter Search, pages 303-329. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 2004.
7. S. Droste, T. Jansen, and I. Wegener. On the analysis of the (1+1) evolutionary algorithm. Theoretical Computer Science, 276:51-81, 2002.
8. M. Fuchs. Large populations are not always the best choice in genetic programming. Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 1033-1038, 1999.
9. J. Garnier, L. Kallel, and M. Schoenauer. Rigorous hitting times for binary mutations. Evolutionary Computation, 7(2):173-203, 1999.
10. D. E. Goldberg. Genetic algorithms in search optimization and machine learning. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1989.
11. D. E. Goldberg. Using time efficiently: Genetic-evolutionary algorithms and the continuation problem. Proceedings of the 1999 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 212-219, 1999. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 99002).
12. D. E. Goldberg. Design of innovation: Lessons from and for competent genetic algorithms. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 2002.
13. D. E. Goldberg, K. Deb, and J. H. Clark. Genetic algorithms, noise, and the sizing of populations. Complex Systems, 6:333-362, 1992. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 91010).
14. D. E. Goldberg, B. Korb, and K. Deb. Messy genetic algorithms: Motivation, analysis, and first results. Complex Systems, 3(5):493-530, 1989. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 89003).
15. D. E. Goldberg and P. Segrest. Finite Markov chain analysis of genetic algorithms. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 1-8, 1987.
16. P. Hansen, N. Mladenovic, and D. Perez-Britos. Variable neighborhood decomposition search. Journal of Heuristics, 7(4): 335-350, 2001.
17. G. Harik, E. Cantú-Paz, D. E. Goldberg, and B. L. Miller. The gambler's ruin problem, genetic algorithms, and the sizing of populations. Evolutionary Computation, 7(3):231-253, 1999. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 96004).
18. J. H. Holland. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 1975.
19. T. Jansen and I. Wegener. On the analysis of evolutionary algorithms - a proof that crossover really can help. Algorithmic, 34(1):47-66, 2002.
20. T. Jansen and I. Wegener. Real royal road functions -where crossover provably is essential. Discrete Applied Mathematics, pages 111-125, 2005.
21. M. Kimura. Diffusion models in population genetics. Journal of Applied Probability, 1:177-232, 1964.
22. C. F. Lima, M. Pelikan, K. Sastry, M. V. Butz, D. E. Goldberg, and F. Lobo. Substructural neighborhoods for local search in the bayesian optimization algorithm. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature (PPSN IX), pages 232-241, 2006. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 20060).
23. S. Luke. When short runs beat long runs. Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 74-80, 2001.
24. B. L. Miller. Noise, Sampling, and Efficient Genetic Algorithms. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, May 1997. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 97001).
25. B. L. Miller and D. E. Goldberg. Genetic algorithms, tournament selection, and the effects of noise. Complex Systems, 9(3):193-212, 1995. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 95006).
26. M. Mitchell, J. Holland, and S. Forrest. When will a genetic algorithm outperform hill-climbing. Advances in Nueral Information Processing Systems, 6:51-58, 1994.
27. H. Mühlenbein. Evolution in time and space- the parallel genetic algorithm. Foundations of Genetic Algorithms, pages 316-337, 1991.
28. H. Mühlenbein. How genetic algorithms really work: Mutation and hillclimbing. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature II, pages 15-26, 1992.
29. Y. S. Ong, M. H. Lim, N. Zhu, and K. W. Wong. Classification of adaptive memetic algorithms: A comparative study. IEEE Transactions On Systems, Man and Cybernetics - Part B, 36(1):141-152, 2006.
30. W. M. Rudnick. Genetic algorithms and fitness variances with an application to the automated design of artificial neural networks. PhD thesis, Oregon Graduate Institute of Science & Technology, Beaverton, OR, 1992.
31. K. Sastry. Evaluation-relaxation schemes for genetic and evolutionary algorithms. Master's thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 2001. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 2002004).
32. K. Sastry and D. E. Goldberg. Designing competent mutation operators via probabilistic model building of neighborhoods. Proceedings of the 2004 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, 2:114-125, 2004. Also IlliGAL Report No. 2004006.
33. K. Sastry and D. E. Goldberg. Let's get ready to rumble: Crossover versus mutation head to head. Proceedings of the 2004 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, 2:126-137, 2004. Also IlliGAL Report No. 2004005.
34. K. Sastry and D. E. Goldberg. Let's get ready to rumble redux: Crossover versus mutation head to head on exponentially scaled problems. IlliGAL Report No. 2007005, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, February 2007.
35. K. Sastry, P. Winward, D. E. Goldberg, and C. F. Lima. Fluctuating crosstalk as a source of deterministic noise and its effects on ga scalability. Applications of Evolutionary Computing EvoWorkshops2006: EvoBIO, EvoCOMNET, EvoHOT, EvoIASP, EvoInteraction, EvoMUSART, EvoSTOCK, pages 740-751, 2006. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 2005025).
36. R. Srivastava. Time continutation in genetic algorithms. Master's thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 2002.
37. R. Srivastava and D. E. Goldberg. Verification of the theory of genetic and evolutionary continuation. Proceedings of the 2001 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 551-558, 2001. (Also IlliGAL Report No. 2001007).
38. T. Storch and I. Wegener. Real royal road functions for constant population size. Theoretical Computer Science, 320:123-134, 2004.
39. D. Thierens and D. E. Goldberg. Convergence models of genetic algorithm selection schemes. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, 3:116-121, 1994.
40. D. Thierens, D. E. Goldberg, and A. G. Pereira. Domino convergence, drift, and the temporal-salience structure of problems. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, pages 535-540, 1998.
41. J.-P. Watson, A. Howe, and L. Whitley. An analysis of iterated local search for job-shop scheduling. Proceedings of the Fifth Metaheuristics International Conference, pages 1101-1106, 2003.