Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2725494.2725511acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfogaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Hypomixability Elimination In Evolutionary Systems

Published: 17 January 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Hypomixability Elimination is an intriguing form of computation thought to underlie general-purpose, non-local, noise-tolerant adaptation in recombinative evolutionary systems. We demonstrate that hypomixability elimination in recombinative evolutionary systems can be efficient by using it to obtain optimal bounds on the time and queries required to solve a subclass (k=7, η=1/5) of a familiar computational learning problem: PAC-learning parities with noisy membership queries; where k is the number of relevant attributes and η is the oracle's noise rate. Specifically, we show that a simple genetic algorithm with uniform crossover (free recombination) that treats the noisy membership query oracle as a fitness function can be rigged to PAC-learn the relevant variables in O(log (n/δ)) queries and O(n log (n/δ)) time, where n is the total number of attributes and δ is the probability of error. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time optimally efficient computation has been shown to occur in, an evolutionary algorithm, on a non-trivial problem.
The optimality result and indeed the implicit implementation of hypomixability elimination by a simple genetic algorithm depends crucially on recombination. This dependence yields a fresh, unified explanation for sex, adaptation, speciation, and the emergence of modularity in evolutionary systems. Compared to other explanations, Hypomixability Theory is exceedingly parsimonious. For example, it does not assume deleterious mutation, a changing fitness landscape, or the existence of building blocks.

References

[1]
Lee Altenberg. Nk fitness landscapes. Handbook of evolutionary computation, pages 7--2, 1997.
[2]
Nicholas H Barton and Brian Charlesworth. Why sex and recombination? Science, 281(5385):1986--1990, 1998.
[3]
Avrim L Blum and Pat Langley. Selection of relevant features and examples in machine learning. Artificial intelligence, 97(1):245--271, 1997.
[4]
Keki M. Burjorjee. Sufficient conditions for coarse-graining evolutionary dynamics. In Foundations of Genetic Algorithms 9 (FOGA IX), 2007.
[5]
Keki M. Burjorjee. Generative Fixation: A Unifed Explanation for the Adaptive Capacity of Simple Recombinative Genetic Algorithms. PhD thesis, Brandeis University, 2009.
[6]
Keki M. Burjorjee. Explaining optimization in genetic algorithms with uniform crossover. In Proceedings of the twelfth workshop on Foundations of genetic algorithms XII. ACM, 2013.
[7]
Keki M. Burjorjee and Jordan B. Pollack. A general coarse-graining framework for studying simultaneous inter-population constraints induced by evolutionary operations. In GECCO 2006: Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation. ACM Press, 2006.
[8]
L.J. Eshelman, R.A. Caruana, and J.D. Schaffer. Biases in the crossover landscape. Proceedings of the third international conference on Genetic algorithms table of contents, pages 10--19, 1989.
[9]
Vitaly Feldman. Attribute-efficient and non-adaptive learning of parities and dnf expressions. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 8(1431--1460):101, 2007.
[10]
David E. Goldberg. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization & Machine Learning. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1989.
[11]
Sally A Goldman, Michael J Kearns, and Robert E Schapire. Exact identification of read-once formulas using fixed points of amplification functions. SIAM Journal on Computing, 22(4):705--726, 1993.
[12]
William D Hamilton, Robert Axelrod, and Reiko Tanese. Sexual reproduction as an adaptation to resist parasites (a review). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 87(9):3566--3573, 1990.
[13]
John H. Holland. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence. MIT Press, 1975.
[14]
John H. Holland. Building blocks, cohort genetic algorithms, and hyperplane-defined functions. Evolutionary Computation, 8(4):373--391, 2000.
[15]
E.T. Jaynes. Probability Theory: The Logic of Science. Cambridge University Press, 2007.
[16]
S.A. Kauffman. The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. Biophysical Soc, 1993.
[17]
Michael J Kearns and Umesh Virkumar Vazirani. An introduction to computational learning theory. MIT press, 1994.
[18]
Alexey S Kondrashov. Selection against harmful mutations in large sexual and asexual populations. Genetical research, 40(03):325--332, 1982.
[19]
Adi Livnat, Christos Papadimitriou, Jonathan Dushoff, and Marcus W Feldman. A mixability theory for the role of sex in evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(50):19803--19808, 2008.
[20]
Adi Livnat, Christos Papadimitriou, Nicholas Pippenger, and Marcus W Feldman. Sex, mixability, and modularity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(4):1452--1457, 2010.
[21]
David JC MacKay. Information theory, inference, and learning algorithms, volume 7. Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[22]
Dusan Misevic, Charles Ofria, and Richard E Lenski. Sexual reproduction reshapes the genetic architecture of digital organisms. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273(1585):457--464, 2006.
[23]
Melanie Mitchell. An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1996.
[24]
Elchanan Mossel, Ryan O'Donnell, and Rocco P Servedio. Learning juntas. In Proceedings of the thirty-fifth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 206--212. ACM, 2003.
[25]
Hermann Joseph Muller. The relation of recombination to mutational advance. Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis, 1(1):2--9, 1964.
[26]
A.E. Nix and M.D. Vose. Modeling genetic algorithms with Markov chains. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 5(1):79--88, 1992.
[27]
Karl Popper. Conjectures and Refutations. Routledge, 2007.
[28]
Karl Popper. The Logic Of Scientific Discovery. Routledge, 2007.
[29]
Sean H. Rice. The evolution of developmental interactions. Oxford University Press, 2000.
[30]
Uehara, Tsuchida, and Wegener. Identification of partial disjunction, parity, and threshold functions. TCS: Theoretical Computer Science, 230, 2000.
[31]
Leslie Valiant. Probably approximately correct: nature's algorithms for learning and prospering in a complex world. Basic Books, 2013.
[32]
Richard A. Watson. Compositional Evolution: The Impact of Sex, Symbiosis and Modularity on the Gradualist Framework of Evolution. The MIT Press, 2006.

Cited By

View all
  • (2020)Memetic algorithms outperform evolutionary algorithms in multimodal optimisationArtificial Intelligence10.1016/j.artint.2020.103345(103345)Online publication date: Jun-2020
  • (2017)Use the scientific method in computer scienceCommunications of the ACM10.1145/303296560:2(8-9)Online publication date: 23-Jan-2017

Index Terms

  1. Hypomixability Elimination In Evolutionary Systems

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    FOGA '15: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Conference on Foundations of Genetic Algorithms XIII
    January 2015
    200 pages
    ISBN:9781450334341
    DOI:10.1145/2725494
    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 the author(s) 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: 17 January 2015

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. adaptation
    2. evolution
    3. genetic algorithms
    4. hypomixability
    5. juntas
    6. learning parities
    7. recombination.
    8. sex
    9. speciation

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    FOGA '15
    Sponsor:
    FOGA '15: Foundations of Genetic Algorithms XIII
    January 17 - 22, 2015
    Aberystwyth, United Kingdom

    Acceptance Rates

    FOGA '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 16 of 26 submissions, 62%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 72 of 131 submissions, 55%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
    Reflects downloads up to 24 Dec 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2020)Memetic algorithms outperform evolutionary algorithms in multimodal optimisationArtificial Intelligence10.1016/j.artint.2020.103345(103345)Online publication date: Jun-2020
    • (2017)Use the scientific method in computer scienceCommunications of the ACM10.1145/303296560:2(8-9)Online publication date: 23-Jan-2017

    View Options

    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