Positional Bias Does Not Influence Cartesian Genetic Programming with Crossover

被引:0
|
作者
Cui, Henning [1 ]
Heider, Michael [1 ]
Haehner, Joerg [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Augsburg, D-86159 Augsburg, Germany
来源
PARALLEL PROBLEM SOLVING FROM NATURE-PPSN XVIII, PPSN 2024, PT I | 2024年 / 15148卷
关键词
Cartesian Genetic Programming; CGP; Crossover; Recombination; Positional Bias;
D O I
10.1007/978-3-031-70055-2_10
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
The recombination operator plays an important role in many evolutionary algorithms. However, in Cartesian Genetic Programming (CGP), which is part of the aforementioned category, the usefulness of crossover is contested. In this work, we investigate whether CGP's positional bias actually influences the usefulness of the crossover operator negatively. This bias describes a skewed distribution of CGP's active and inactive nodes, which might lead to destructive behaviours of standard recombination operators. We try to answer our hypothesis by employing one standard CGP implementation and one without the effects of positional bias. Both versions are combined with one of four standard crossover operators, or with no crossover operator. Additionally, two different selection methods are used to configure a CGP variant. We then analyse their performance and convergence behaviour on eight benchmarks taken from the Boolean and symbolic regression domain. By using Bayesian inference, we are able to rank them, and we found that positional bias does not influence CGP with crossover. Furthermore, we argue that the current research on CGP with standard crossover operators is incomplete, and CGP with recombination might not negatively impact its evolutionary search process. On the contrary, using CGP with crossover improves its performance.
引用
收藏
页码:151 / 167
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Asynchronous Parallel Cartesian Genetic Programming
    Harter, Adam
    Tauritz, Daniel R.
    Siever, William M.
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2017 GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE COMPANION (GECCO'17 COMPANION), 2017, : 1820 - 1824
  • [22] Multitask Evolution with Cartesian Genetic Programming
    Scott, Eric O.
    De Jong, Kenneth A.
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2017 GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE COMPANION (GECCO'17 COMPANION), 2017, : 255 - 256
  • [23] Compact Version of Cartesian Genetic Programming
    Burian, Petr
    2014 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON APPLIED ELECTRONICS (AE), 2014, : 63 - 66
  • [24] Comparative Evaluation of Genetic Operators in Cartesian Genetic Programming
    Manazir, Abdul
    Raza, Khalid
    INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS DESIGN AND APPLICATIONS, ISDA 2021, 2022, 418 : 765 - 774
  • [25] Homologous crossover in genetic programming
    Francone, FD
    Conrads, M
    Banzhaf, W
    Nordin, P
    GECCO-99: PROCEEDINGS OF THE GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE, 1999, : 1021 - 1026
  • [26] Genetic programming with controlled crossover
    Jagielski, R
    PROGRESS IN CONNECTIONIST-BASED INFORMATION SYSTEMS, VOLS 1 AND 2, 1998, : 401 - 403
  • [27] Ripple crossover in genetic programming
    Keijzer, M
    Ryan, C
    O'Neill, M
    Cattolico, M
    Babovic, V
    GENETIC PROGRAMMING, PROCEEDINGS, 2001, 2038 : 74 - 86
  • [28] Cartesian Genetic Programming as an Optimizer of Programs Evolved with Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming
    Koncal, Ondrej
    Sekanina, Lukas
    GENETIC PROGRAMMING, EUROGP 2019, 2019, 11451 : 98 - 113
  • [29] Reduction of Fitness Calculations in Cartesian Genetic Programming
    Burian, Petr
    2013 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON APPLIED ELECTRONICS (AE), 2013, : 53 - 58
  • [30] Redundancy and computational efficiency in Cartesian genetic programming
    Miller, JF
    Smith, SL
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION, 2006, 10 (02) : 167 - 174