最大化漂移不是解决OneMax的最佳方案

IF 4.6 2区 计算机科学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Evolutionary Computation Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.1162/evco_a_00290
Nathan Buskulic;Carola Doerr
{"title":"最大化漂移不是解决OneMax的最佳方案","authors":"Nathan Buskulic;Carola Doerr","doi":"10.1162/evco_a_00290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It seems very intuitive that for the maximization of the OneMax problem Om(x):=∑i=1nxi the best that an elitist unary unbiased search algorithm can do is to store a best so far solution, and to modify it with the operator that yields the best possible expected progress in function value. This assumption has been implicitly used in several empirical works. In Doerr et al. (2020), it was formally proven that this approach is indeed almost optimal. In this work, we prove that drift maximization is not optimal. More precisely, we show that for most fitness levels between n/2 and 2n/3 the optimal mutation strengths are larger than the drift-maximizing ones. This implies that the optimal RLS is more risk-affine than the variant maximizing the stepwise expected progress. We show similar results for the mutation rates of the classic (1+1) Evolutionary Algorithm (EA) and its resampling variant, the (1+1) EA>0. As a result of independent interest we show that the optimal mutation strengths, unlike the drift-maximizing ones, can be even.","PeriodicalId":50470,"journal":{"name":"Evolutionary Computation","volume":"29 4","pages":"521-541"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maximizing Drift Is Not Optimal for Solving OneMax\",\"authors\":\"Nathan Buskulic;Carola Doerr\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/evco_a_00290\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It seems very intuitive that for the maximization of the OneMax problem Om(x):=∑i=1nxi the best that an elitist unary unbiased search algorithm can do is to store a best so far solution, and to modify it with the operator that yields the best possible expected progress in function value. This assumption has been implicitly used in several empirical works. In Doerr et al. (2020), it was formally proven that this approach is indeed almost optimal. In this work, we prove that drift maximization is not optimal. More precisely, we show that for most fitness levels between n/2 and 2n/3 the optimal mutation strengths are larger than the drift-maximizing ones. This implies that the optimal RLS is more risk-affine than the variant maximizing the stepwise expected progress. We show similar results for the mutation rates of the classic (1+1) Evolutionary Algorithm (EA) and its resampling variant, the (1+1) EA>0. As a result of independent interest we show that the optimal mutation strengths, unlike the drift-maximizing ones, can be even.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50470,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evolutionary Computation\",\"volume\":\"29 4\",\"pages\":\"521-541\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evolutionary Computation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9655645/\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evolutionary Computation","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9655645/","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

看起来非常直观的是,对于OneMax问题的最大化,Om(x):=∑i=1nxi,精英一元无偏搜索算法所能做的最好的事情就是存储迄今为止最好的解,并用运算符对其进行修改,以在函数值上产生尽可能好的预期进展。这一假设在几部经验著作中得到了隐含的应用。在Doerr等人(2020)中,正式证明了这种方法几乎是最优的。在这项工作中,我们证明了漂移最大化不是最优的。更准确地说,我们表明,对于n/2和2n/3之间的大多数适应度水平,最优突变强度大于漂移最大化强度。这意味着最优RLS比使逐步预期进展最大化的变体更具仿射风险。我们对经典的(1+1)进化算法(EA)及其重采样变体(1+1)EA>0的突变率给出了类似的结果。作为独立兴趣的结果,我们表明,与漂移最大化的突变强度不同,最佳突变强度可以是均匀的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Maximizing Drift Is Not Optimal for Solving OneMax
It seems very intuitive that for the maximization of the OneMax problem Om(x):=∑i=1nxi the best that an elitist unary unbiased search algorithm can do is to store a best so far solution, and to modify it with the operator that yields the best possible expected progress in function value. This assumption has been implicitly used in several empirical works. In Doerr et al. (2020), it was formally proven that this approach is indeed almost optimal. In this work, we prove that drift maximization is not optimal. More precisely, we show that for most fitness levels between n/2 and 2n/3 the optimal mutation strengths are larger than the drift-maximizing ones. This implies that the optimal RLS is more risk-affine than the variant maximizing the stepwise expected progress. We show similar results for the mutation rates of the classic (1+1) Evolutionary Algorithm (EA) and its resampling variant, the (1+1) EA>0. As a result of independent interest we show that the optimal mutation strengths, unlike the drift-maximizing ones, can be even.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Evolutionary Computation
Evolutionary Computation 工程技术-计算机:理论方法
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
1.50%
发文量
20
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Evolutionary Computation is a leading journal in its field. It provides an international forum for facilitating and enhancing the exchange of information among researchers involved in both the theoretical and practical aspects of computational systems drawing their inspiration from nature, with particular emphasis on evolutionary models of computation such as genetic algorithms, evolutionary strategies, classifier systems, evolutionary programming, and genetic programming. It welcomes articles from related fields such as swarm intelligence (e.g. Ant Colony Optimization and Particle Swarm Optimization), and other nature-inspired computation paradigms (e.g. Artificial Immune Systems). As well as publishing articles describing theoretical and/or experimental work, the journal also welcomes application-focused papers describing breakthrough results in an application domain or methodological papers where the specificities of the real-world problem led to significant algorithmic improvements that could possibly be generalized to other areas.
期刊最新文献
Genetic Programming-based Feature Selection for Symbolic Regression on Incomplete Data. Tail Bounds on the Runtime of Categorical Compact Genetic Algorithm. Optimizing Monotone Chance-Constrained Submodular Functions Using Evolutionary Multi-Objective Algorithms. Genetic Programming for Automatically Evolving Multiple Features to Classification. A Tri-Objective Method for Bi-Objective Feature Selection in Classification.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1