Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2463372.2463565acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A method to derive fixed budget results from expected optimisation times

Published: 06 July 2013 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    At last year's GECCO a novel perspective for theoretical performance analysis of evolutionary algorithms and other randomised search heuristics was introduced that concentrates on the expected function value after a pre-defined number of steps, called budget. This is significantly different from the common perspective where the expected optimisation time is analysed. While there is a huge body of work and a large collection of tools for the analysis of the expected optimisation time the new fixed budget perspective introduces new analytical challenges. Here it is shown how results on the expected optimisation time that are strengthened by deviation bounds can be systematically turned into fixed budget results. We demonstrate our approach by considering the (1+1) EA on LeadingOnes and significantly improving previous results. We prove that deviating from the expected time by an additive term of ω(n3/2 happens only with probability o(1). This is turned into tight bounds on the function value using the inverse function. We use three, increasingly strong or general approaches to proving the deviation bounds, namely via Chebyshev's inequality, via Chernoff bounds for geometric random variables, and via variable drift analysis.

    References

    [1]
    A. Auger and B. Doerr, editors. Theory of Randomized Search Heuristics. World Scientific, 2011.
    [2]
    S. Böttcher, B. Doerr, and F. Neumann. Optimal fixed and adaptive mutation rates for the LeadingOnes problem. In Proc. of the 11th Int'l Conf. on Parallel Problem Solving From Nature (PPSN 2010), pages 1--10. Springer, 2010. LNCS 6238.
    [3]
    B. Doerr. Analyzing randomized search heuristics: Tools from probability theory. In Auger and DoerrciteAugerDoerr2011, pages 1--20.
    [4]
    B. Doerr, M. Fouz, and C. Witt. Sharp bounds by probability-generating functions and variable drift. In Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Comp. Conf. (GECCO 2011), pages 2083--2090. ACM Press, 2011.
    [5]
    B. Doerr and L. Goldberg. Drift analysis with tail bounds. In Proc. of the 11th Int'l Conf. on Parallel Problem Solving From Nature (PPSN 2010), pages 174--183. Springer, 2010. LNCS 6238.
    [6]
    B. Doerr, T. Jansen, and C. Klein. Comparing global and local mutations on bit strings. In Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Comp. Conf. (GECCO 2008), pages 929--936. ACM Press, 2008.
    [7]
    S. Droste, T. Jansen, and I. Wegener. On the analysis of the (1+1) evolutionary algorithm. Theoretical Comp.\ Science, 276(1--2):51--81, 2002.
    [8]
    B. Hajek. Hitting and occupation time bounds implied by drift analysis with applications. Advances in Applied Probability, 14:502--525, 1982.
    [9]
    T. Jansen. Analyzing Evolutionary Algorithms. The Computer Science Perspective. Springer, 2013.
    [10]
    T. Jansen and C. Zarges. Fixed budget computations: A different perspective on run time analysis. In Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Comp. Conf. (GECCO 2012), pages 1325--1332. ACM Press, 2012.
    [11]
    P. K. Lehre. Drift analysis (tutorial). In Companion to GECCO 2012, pages 1239--1258. ACM Press, 2012.
    [12]
    F. Neumann and C. Witt. Bioinspired Computation in Combinatorial Optimization. Springer, 2010.
    [13]
    P. S. Oliveto and C. Witt. Simplified drift analysis for proving lower bounds in evolutionary computation. Algorithmica, 59(3):369--386, 2011. Erratum in http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.7184.
    [14]
    J. E. Rowe and D. Sudholt. The choice of the offspring population size in the (1, λ) EA. In Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Comp. Conf. (GECCO 2012), pages 1349--1356. ACM Press, 2012.
    [15]
    C. Scheideler. Probabilistic Methods for Coordination Problems, volume 78 of HNI-Verlagsschriftenreihe. University of Paderborn, 2000. Habilitation thesis. Available at: www.cs.jhu.edu/~scheideler/papers/habil.ps.gz.
    [16]
    N. P. Troutman, B. E. Eskridge, and D. F. Hougen. Is "best-so-far" a good algorithmic performance metric? In Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Comp. Conf. (GECCO 2008), pages 1147--1148. ACM Press, 2008.

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)A Gentle Introduction to Theory (for Non-Theoreticians)Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion10.1145/3638530.3648402(800-829)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2024
    • (2024)A Block-Coordinate Descent EMO Algorithm: Theoretical and Empirical AnalysisProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference10.1145/3638529.3654169(493-501)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2024
    • (2024)Fourier Analysis Meets Runtime Analysis: Precise Runtimes on PlateausAlgorithmica10.1007/s00453-024-01232-586:8(2479-2518)Online publication date: 10-May-2024
    • Show More Cited By

    Index Terms

    1. A method to derive fixed budget results from expected optimisation times

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      GECCO '13: Proceedings of the 15th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation
      July 2013
      1672 pages
      ISBN:9781450319638
      DOI:10.1145/2463372
      • Editor:
      • Christian Blum,
      • General Chair:
      • Enrique Alba
      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: 06 July 2013

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. (1+1) ea
      2. fixed budget computation
      3. leadingones
      4. runtime analysis
      5. tail bounds

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Conference

      GECCO '13
      Sponsor:
      GECCO '13: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
      July 6 - 10, 2013
      Amsterdam, The Netherlands

      Acceptance Rates

      GECCO '13 Paper Acceptance Rate 204 of 570 submissions, 36%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 1,669 of 4,410 submissions, 38%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)28
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 10 Aug 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)A Gentle Introduction to Theory (for Non-Theoreticians)Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion10.1145/3638530.3648402(800-829)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2024
      • (2024)A Block-Coordinate Descent EMO Algorithm: Theoretical and Empirical AnalysisProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference10.1145/3638529.3654169(493-501)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2024
      • (2024)Fourier Analysis Meets Runtime Analysis: Precise Runtimes on PlateausAlgorithmica10.1007/s00453-024-01232-586:8(2479-2518)Online publication date: 10-May-2024
      • (2023)A Gentle Introduction to Theory (for Non-Theoreticians)Proceedings of the Companion Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation10.1145/3583133.3595042(946-975)Online publication date: 15-Jul-2023
      • (2023)Do Additional Target Points Speed Up Evolutionary Algorithms?Theoretical Computer Science10.1016/j.tcs.2023.113757(113757)Online publication date: Feb-2023
      • (2022)Influence of Binomial Crossover on Approximation Error of Evolutionary AlgorithmsMathematics10.3390/math1016285010:16(2850)Online publication date: 10-Aug-2022
      • (2022)A gentle introduction to theory (for non-theoreticians)Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion10.1145/3520304.3533628(890-921)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2022
      • (2022)On optimal static and dynamic parameter choices for fixed-target optimizationProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference10.1145/3512290.3528875(876-883)Online publication date: 8-Jul-2022
      • (2022)Lower Bounds from Fitness Levels Made EasyAlgorithmica10.1007/s00453-022-00952-w86:2(367-395)Online publication date: 28-Apr-2022
      • (2022)Towards Fixed-Target Black-Box Complexity AnalysisParallel Problem Solving from Nature – PPSN XVII10.1007/978-3-031-14721-0_42(600-611)Online publication date: 15-Aug-2022
      • Show More Cited By

      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