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
  • [31] Semantically Driven Crossover in Genetic Programming
    Beadle, Lawrence
    Johnson, Colin G.
    2008 IEEE CONGRESS ON EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION, VOLS 1-8, 2008, : 111 - 116
  • [32] Recurrent Cartesian Genetic Programming of Artificial Neural Networks
    Turner, Andrew James
    Miller, Julian Francis
    GENETIC PROGRAMMING AND EVOLVABLE MACHINES, 2017, 18 (02) : 185 - 212
  • [33] Recent Developments in Cartesian Genetic Programming and its Variants
    Manazir, Abdul
    Raza, Khalid
    ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS, 2019, 51 (06)
  • [34] Approximation of Digital Circuits Using Cartesian Genetic Programming
    Babu, Kagana Sarath
    Balaji, N.
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2016 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMMUNICATION AND ELECTRONICS SYSTEMS (ICCES), 2016, : 381 - 386
  • [35] Two New Mutation Techniques for Cartesian Genetic Programming
    Kalkreuth, Roman
    IJCCI: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 11TH INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCE ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, 2019, : 82 - 92
  • [36] Evolving Graphs with Cartesian Genetic Programming with Lexicase Selection
    Lavinas, Yuri
    Cotacero, Kevin
    Cussat-Blanc, Sylvain
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2023 GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE COMPANION, GECCO 2023 COMPANION, 2023, : 1920 - 1924
  • [37] Cartesian Genetic Programming Parameterization in the Context of Audio Synthesis
    Ly, Edward
    Villegas, Julian
    IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING LETTERS, 2023, 30 : 1077 - 1081
  • [38] An Orthogonal Cartesian Genetic Programming Algorithm for Evolvable Hardware
    Ni, Fuchuan
    Li, Yuanxiang
    Yang, Xiaoyan
    Ni, Fuchuan
    Xiang, Jinhai
    2014 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON IDENTIFICATION, INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE IN THE INTERNET OF THINGS (IIKI 2014), 2014, : 220 - 224
  • [39] Recurrent Cartesian Genetic Programming of Artificial Neural Networks
    Andrew James Turner
    Julian Francis Miller
    Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 2017, 18 : 185 - 212
  • [40] Cartesian Genetic Programming Approach for Embryonic Fabric Architecture
    Malhotra, Gayatri
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 6TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION COMMUNICATION AND MANAGEMENT (ICICM 2016), 2016, : 285 - 290