Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/1388969.1389044acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Threshold selecting: best possible probability distribution for crossover selection in genetic algorithms

Published: 12 July 2008 Publication History

Abstract

The paper considers the problem of selecting individuals in the current population in Genetic Algorithms for crossover to find a solution of high fitness of a given combinatorial optimization problem. Many different schemes have been considered in literature as possible selection strategies, such as Windowing, Exponential reduction, Linear transformation or normalization and Binary Tournament selection. It is shown that if one wishes to maximize any linear function of the final state probabilities, e.g. the fitness of the best individual of the final population of the algorithm, then the best probability distribution for selecting individuals in each generation is a rectangular distribution over the individuals sorted by their fitness values. This means uniform probabilities have to be assigned to a group of the best individuals of the population but probabilities equal to zero to individuals with fitness ranks higher than a fixed cutoff, which is equal to a certain rank in the sorted fitness vector. The considered strategy is called Threshold Selecting. The proof applies basic arguments of Markov chains and linear optimization and makes only a few assumptions on the underlying principles and hence applies to a large class of Genetic Algorithms.

References

[1]
S. Boettcher and A. G. Percus. Extremal Optimization: Methods derived from Co-Evolution. In GECCO-99, Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 825--832, Orlando, Florida, July 1999.
[2]
P. G. Busacca, M. Marseguerra, and E. Zio. Multiobjective Optimization by Genetic Algorithms: Application to Safety Systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 72(1):59--74, April 2001.
[3]
M. Chakraborty and U. K. Chakraborty. An Analysis of Linear Ranking and Binary Tournament Selection in Genetic Algorithms. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information, Communications and Signal Processing, pages 407--411, Singapore, September 1997.
[4]
U. K. Chakraborty. A Simpler Derivation of Schema Hazard in Genetic Algorithms. Information Processing Letters, 56(2):77--78, 1995.
[5]
U. K. Chakraborty. Abranching Process Model for Genetic Algorithms. Information Processing Letters, 56(5):281--292, December 1995.
[6]
U. K. Chakraborty, K. Deb, and M. Chakraborty. Analysis of Selection Algorithms: A Markov Chain Approach. Evolutionary Computation, 4(2):133--167, 1997.
[7]
L. D. Chambers. The Practical Handbook of Genetic Algorithms: Applications. CRC Press Inc., 2000.
[8]
G. Dueck and T. Scheuer. Threshold Accepting: A General Purpose Optimization Algorithm Appearing Superior to Simulated Annealing. Journal of Computational Physics, 90:161--175, 1990.
[9]
A. Franz and K. H. Hoffmann. Optimal Annealing Schedules for a Modified Tsallis Statistics. Jounal of Computational Physics, 176(1):196--204, February 2002.
[10]
A. Franz and K. H. Hoffmann. Threshold Accepting as Limit Case for a Modified Tsallis Statistics. Applied Mathematics Letters, 16(1):27--31, January 2003.
[11]
A. Franz, K. H. Hoffmann, and P. Salamon. Best Possible Strategy for Finding Ground States. Physical Review Letters, 86(23):5219--5222, June 2001.
[12]
P. Godefroid and S. Khurshid. Exploring Very Large State Spaces Using Genetic Algorithms. In J.-P. Katoen and P. Stevens, editors, LNCS 2280, pages 266--280. Springer--Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2002.
[13]
F. Heilmann, K. H. Hoffmann, and P. Salamon. Best Possible Probability Distribution over Extremal Optimization Ranks. Europhysics Letters, 66(3):305--310, March 2004.
[14]
B. Hemmateenejad, M. Akhond, R. Miri, and M. Shamsipur. Genetic Algorithm Applied to the Selection of Factors in Principal Component-Artificial Neural Networks: Application to QSAR Study of Calcium Channel Antagonist Activity of 1,4-Dihydropyridines (Nifedipine Analogous). Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 43(4):1328--1334, June 2003.
[15]
K. H. Hoffmann, F. Heilmann, and P. Salamon. Fitness Threshold Accepting over Extremal Optimization Ranks. Physical Review E, 70(4):046704--+, October 2004.
[16]
S. Kikuchi, D. Tominaga, M. Arita, K. Takahashi, and M. Tomita. Dynamic Modeling of Genetic Networks Using Genetic Algorithm and S-System. Bioinformatics, 19(5):643--650, 2003.
[17]
S. Kirkpatrick, C. Galatt, and M. Vecchi. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science, 4598, 1983.
[18]
A. Kolen. A Genetic Algorithm for the Partial Binary Constraint Satisfaction Problem: an Application to a Frequency Assignment Problem. Statistica Neerlandica, 61(1):4--15, February 2007.
[19]
H. Mühlenbein and D. Schlierkamp-Voosen. The Science of Breeding and its Application to the Breeder Genetic Algorithm (BGA). Evolutionary Computation, 1(4):335--360, 1993.
[20]
J.-P. Rennard. Introduction to Genetic Algorithms. http://www.rennard.org/alife/english/gavgb.pdf, 2000. {Online; accessed 29--February-2008}.
[21]
D. Srinivasan and L. Rachmawati. An Efficient Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithm with Steady-State Replacement Model. In Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pages 715--722, Seattle, Washington, USA, July 2006.
[22]
C. R. Stephens, M. Toussaint, D. Whitley, and P. F. Stadler, editors. Foundations of Genetic Algorithms: 9th International Workshop, FOGA 2007, Mexico City, Mexico, 2007. Springer Berlin.
[23]
C. Tsallis and D. A. Stariolo. Generalized Simulated Annealing. Physica A, 233:395--406, 1996.

Cited By

View all
  • (2014)Artificial Evolution by Viability Rather than CompetitionPLoS ONE10.1371/journal.pone.00868319:1(e86831)Online publication date: 29-Jan-2014
  • (2010)Empirically studying the role of selection operators duringsearch-based test suite prioritizationProceedings of the 12th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation10.1145/1830483.1830735(1373-1380)Online publication date: 7-Jul-2010

Index Terms

  1. Threshold selecting: best possible probability distribution for crossover selection in genetic algorithms

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    GECCO '08: Proceedings of the 10th annual conference companion on Genetic and evolutionary computation
    July 2008
    1182 pages
    ISBN:9781605581316
    DOI:10.1145/1388969
    • Conference Chair:
    • Conor Ryan,
    • Editor:
    • Maarten Keijzer
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 12 July 2008

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. crossover selection
    2. genetic algorithms
    3. markov process
    4. master equation
    5. threshold selecting

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    GECCO08
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 1,669 of 4,410 submissions, 38%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)3
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 10 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2014)Artificial Evolution by Viability Rather than CompetitionPLoS ONE10.1371/journal.pone.00868319:1(e86831)Online publication date: 29-Jan-2014
    • (2010)Empirically studying the role of selection operators duringsearch-based test suite prioritizationProceedings of the 12th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation10.1145/1830483.1830735(1373-1380)Online publication date: 7-Jul-2010

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media