Many-objective Optimization via Voting for Elites

被引:0
作者
Dean, Jackson [1 ]
Cheney, Nick [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Vermont, Burlington, VT 05401 USA
来源
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2023 GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE COMPANION, GECCO 2023 COMPANION | 2023年
关键词
Neuroevolution; Indirect Encoding; CPPN; Many-Objective Optimization; MAP-Elites; Stepping Stones;
D O I
10.1145/3583133.3590693
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Real-world problems are often comprised of many objectives and require solutions that carefully trade-off between them. Current approaches to many-objective optimization often require challenging assumptions, like knowledge of the importance/difficulty of objectives in a weighted-sum single-objective paradigm, or enormous populations to overcome the curse of dimensionality in multiobjective Pareto optimization. Combining elements from Many-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms and Quality Diversity algorithms like MAP-Elites, we propose Many-objective Optimization via Voting for Elites (MOVE). MOVE maintains a map of elites that perform well on different subsets of the objective functions. On a 14-objective image-neuroevolution problem, we demonstrate that MOVE is viable with a population of as few as 50 elites and outperforms a naive single-objective baseline. We find that the algorithm's performance relies on solutions jumping across bins (for a parent to produce a child that is elite for a different subset of objectives). We suggest that this type of goal-switching is an implicit method to automatic identification of stepping stones or curriculum learning. We comment on the similarities and differences between MOVE and MAP-Elites, hoping to provide insight to aid in the understanding of that approach and suggest future work that may inform this approach's use for many-objective problems in general.
引用
收藏
页码:131 / 134
页数:4
相关论文
共 29 条
  • [1] Innovation Engines: Automated Creativity and Improved Stochastic Optimization via Deep Learning
    Anh Nguyen
    Yosinski, Jason
    Clune, Jeff
    [J]. GECCO'15: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2015 GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE, 2015, : 959 - 966
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2008, ALife XI
  • [3] Chand S., 2015, SURV OPER RES MANAG, V20, P35, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.SORMS.2015.08.001
  • [4] Coello C. A. C., 2007, Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-objective problems, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-36797-2
  • [5] Quality and Diversity Optimization: A Unifying Modular Framework
    Cully, Antoine
    Demiris, Yiannis
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION, 2018, 22 (02) : 245 - 259
  • [6] A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II
    Deb, K
    Pratap, A
    Agarwal, S
    Meyarivan, T
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION, 2002, 6 (02) : 182 - 197
  • [7] Deb K., 2005, Kangal report, 2005011
  • [8] FORREST S, 1993, FOUNDATIONS OF GENETIC ALGORITHMS 2, P109
  • [9] Are Quality Diversity Algorithms Better at Generating Stepping Stones than Objective-based Search?
    Gaier, Adam
    Asteroth, Alexander
    Mouret, Jean-Baptiste
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2019 GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE COMPANION (GECCCO'19 COMPANION), 2019, : 115 - 116
  • [10] Incremental evolution of complex general behavior
    Gomez, F
    Miikkulainen, R
    [J]. ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR, 1997, 5 (3-4) : 317 - 342