Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3583131.3590418acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

An Investigation of Geometric Semantic GP with Linear Scaling

Published: 12 July 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Geometric semantic genetic programming (GSGP) and linear scaling (LS) have both, independently, shown the ability to outperform standard genetic programming (GP) for symbolic regression. GSGP uses geometric semantic genetic operators, different from the standard ones, without altering the fitness, while LS modifies the fitness without altering the genetic operators. So far, these two methods have already been joined together in only one practical application. However, to the best of our knowledge, a methodological study on the pros and cons of integrating these two methods has never been performed. In this paper, we present a study of GSGP-LS, a system that integrates GSGP and LS. The results, obtained on five hand-tailored benchmarks and six real-life problems, indicate that GSGP-LS outperforms GSGP in the majority of the cases, confirming the expected benefit of this integration. However, for some particularly hard datasets, GSGP-LS overfits training data, being outperformed by GSGP on unseen data. Additional experiments using standard GP, with and without LS, confirm this trend also when standard crossover and mutation are employed. This contradicts the idea that LS is always beneficial for GP, warning the practitioners about its risk of overfitting in some specific cases.

References

[1]
Francesco Archetti, Ilaria Giordani, and Leonardo Vanneschi. 2010. Genetic programming for anticancer therapeutic response prediction using the NCI-60 dataset. Computers & Operations Research 37 (08 2010), 1395--1405.
[2]
Francesco Archetti, Stefano Lanzeni, Enza Messina, and Leonardo Vanneschi. 2007. Genetic programming for computational pharmacokinetics in drug discovery and development. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 8, 4 (2007), 413--432.
[3]
D.A. Augusto and H.J.C. Barbosa. 2000. Symbolic regression via genetic programming. In Proceedings. Vol.1. Sixth Brazilian Symposium on Neural Networks. 173--178.
[4]
Raja Muhammad Atif Azad and Conor Ryan. 2014. A Simple Approach to Lifetime Learning in Genetic Programming-Based Symbolic Regression. Evolutionary Computation 22, 2 (06 2014), 287--317. arXiv:https://direct.mit.edu/evco/article-pdf/22/2/287/1509584/evco_a_00111.pdf
[5]
Illya Bakurov, Marco Buzzelli, Mauro Castelli, Leonardo Vanneschi, and Raimondo Schettini. 2021. General Purpose Optimization Library (GPOL): A Flexible and Efficient Multi-Purpose Optimization Library in Python. Applied Sciences 11, 11 (2021).
[6]
Mauro Castelli, Luca Manzoni, Sara Silva, Leonardo Vanneschi, and Aleš Popovič. 2017. The influence of population size in geometric semantic GP. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 32 (2017), 110--120.
[7]
Mauro Castelli, Sara Silva, and Leonardo Vanneschi. 2015. A C++ framework for geometric semantic genetic programming. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 16, 1 (2015), 73--81.
[8]
Mauro Castelli, Leonardo Trujillo, Leonardo Vanneschi, Sara Silva, Emigdio Z-Flores, and Pierrick Legrand. 2015. Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming with Local Search. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Madrid, Spain) (GECCO '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 999--1006.
[9]
Dan Costelloe and Conor Ryan. 2009. On Improving Generalisation in Genetic Programming. In Genetic Programming, Leonardo Vanneschi, Steven Gustafson, Alberto Moraglio, Ivanoe De Falco, and Marc Ebner (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 61--72.
[10]
Grant Dick, Aysha P Rimoni, and Peter A Whigham. 2015. A re-examination of the use of genetic programming on the oral bioavailability problem. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. 1015--1022.
[11]
Ivo Gonçalves and Sara Silva. 2013. Balancing Learning and Overfitting in Genetic Programming with Interleaved Sampling of Training Data. In Genetic Programming, Krzysztof Krawiec, Alberto Moraglio, Ting Hu, A. Şima Etaner-Uyar, and Bin Hu (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 73--84.
[12]
Ivo Gonçalves, Sara Silva, and Carlos M. Fonseca. 2015. On the Generalization Ability of Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming. In Genetic Programming, Penousal Machado, Malcolm I. Heywood, James McDermott, Mauro Castelli, Pablo García-Sánchez, Paolo Burelli, Sebastian Risi, and Kevin Sim (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 41--52.
[13]
Ivo Gonçalves, Sara Silva, Carlos M Fonseca, and Mauro Castelli. 2017. Unsure when to stop? ask your semantic neighbors. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. 929--936.
[14]
Isabelle Guyon and André Elisseeff. 2003. An Introduction to Variable and Feature Selection. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3, null (mar 2003), 1157--1182.
[15]
David Harrison and Daniel L Rubinfeld. 1978. Hedonic housing prices and the demand for clean air. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 5, 1 (1978), 81--102.
[16]
H.G. Hiden, M.J. Willis, M.T. Tham, P. Turner, and G.A. Montague. 1997. Nonlinear principal components analysis using genetic programming. In Second International Conference On Genetic Algorithms In Engineering Systems: Innovations And Applications. 302--307.
[17]
Hitoshi Iba, Hugo de Garis, and Taisuke Sato. 1994. Genetic Programming Using a Minimum Description Length Principle. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 265--284.
[18]
H. Iba and N. Nikolaev. 2000. Genetic programming polynomial models of financial data series. In Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC00 (Cat. No.00TH8512), Vol. 2. 1459--1466 vol.2.
[19]
Ilknur Icke and Joshua C. Bongard. 2013. Improving genetic programming based symbolic regression using deterministic machine learning. In 2013 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. 1763--1770.
[20]
M. Keijzer. 2003. Improving Symbolic Regression with interval arithmetic and linear scaling. In Genetic Programming, Proceedings of the 6th European Conference, EuroGP 2003 (LNCS, Vol. 2610), C. Ryan et al. (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Essex, 71--83.
[21]
Maarten Keijzer. 2004. Scaled Symbolic Regression. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 5, 3 (sep 2004), 259--269.
[22]
John R. Koza. 1992. Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural Selection. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
[23]
Max A. Little, Patrick E. McSharry, Stephen J. Roberts, Declan AE Costello, and Irene M. Moroz. 2007. Exploiting Nonlinear Recurrence and Fractal Scaling Properties for Voice Disorder Detection. BioMedical Engineering OnLine 6, 1 (26 Jun 2007), 23.
[24]
Joao Francisco B. S. Martins, Luiz Otavio V. B. Oliveira, Luis F. Miranda, Felipe Casadei, and Gisele L. Pappa. 2018. Solving the Exponential Growth of Symbolic Regression Trees in Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Kyoto, Japan) (GECCO '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1151--1158.
[25]
James McDermott, Gabriel Kronberger, Patryk Orzechowski, Leonardo Vanneschi, Luca Manzoni, Roman Kalkreuth, and Mauro Castelli. 2022. Genetic Programming Benchmarks: Looking Back and Looking Forward. SIGEVOlution 15, 3, Article 1 (dec 2022), 19 pages.
[26]
James McDermott, David R. White, Sean Luke, Luca Manzoni, Mauro Castelli, Leonardo Vanneschi, Wojciech Jaskowski, Krzysztof Krawiec, Robin Harper, Kenneth De Jong, and Una-May O'Reilly. 2012. Genetic Programming Needs Better Benchmarks. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA) (GECCO '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 791--798.
[27]
A. Moraglio. 2014. An efficient implementation of GSGP using higher-order functions and memoization. In Semantic Methods in Genetic Programming, Workshop at Parallel Problem Solving from Nature (Ljubljana, Slovenia).
[28]
Alberto Moraglio, Krzysztof Krawiec, and ColinG. Johnson. 2012. Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming. In Parallel Problem Solving from Nature - PPSN XII, CarlosA.Coello Coello, Vincenzo Cutello, Kalyanmoy Deb, Stephanie Forrest, Giuseppe Nicosia, and Mario Pavone (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7491. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 21--31.
[29]
Alberto Moraglio and Andrea Mambrini. 2013. Runtime Analysis of Mutation-Based Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming for Basis Functions Regression. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) (GECCO '13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 989--996.
[30]
Miguel Nicolau, Alexandros Agapitos, Michael O'Neill, and Anthony Brabazon. 2015. Guidelines for defining benchmark problems in Genetic Programming. In 2015 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC). 1152--1159.
[31]
Miguel Nicolau and James McDermott. 2020. Genetic Programming Symbolic Regression: What Is the Prior on the Prediction? Springer International Publishing, Cham, 201--225.
[32]
N.Y. Nikolaev and H. Iba. 2001. Regularization approach to inductive genetic programming. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 5, 4 (2001), 359--375.
[33]
Cassio Pennachin, Moshe Looks, and João A. de Vasconcelos. 2010. Robust Symbolic Regression with Afine Arithmetic. In Genetic and Evolutionary Computation COnference (GECCO).
[34]
Gloria Pietropolli, Luca Manzoni, Alessia Paoletti, and Mauro Castelli. 2022. Combining geometric semantic gp with gradient-descent optimization. In European Conference on Genetic Programming (Part of EvoStar). Springer, 19--33.
[35]
Adil Raja, R. Muhammad Atif Azad, Colin Flanagan, and Conor Ryan. 2007. RealTime, Non-Intrusive Evaluation of VoIP (EuroGP'07). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 217--228.
[36]
Nuno M. Rodrigues, João E. Batista, William La Cava, Leonardo Vanneschi, and Sara Silva. 2022. SLUG: Feature Selection Using Genetic Algorithms and Genetic Programming. In Genetic Programming, Eric Medvet, Gisele Pappa, and Bing Xue (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 68--84.
[37]
Stefano Ruberto, Valerio Terragni, and Jason Moore. 2021. A semantic genetic programming framework based on dynamic targets. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 22 (12 2021), 1--31.
[38]
Stefano Ruberto, Valerio Terragni, and Jason H. Moore. 2020. SGP-DT: Towards Effective Symbolic Regression with a Semantic GP Approach Based on Dynamic Targets. In Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion (Cancún, Mexico) (GECCO '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 25--26.
[39]
Stefano Ruberto, Valerio Terragni, and Jason H. Moore. 2021. Towards Effective GP Multi-Class Classification Based on Dynamic Targets. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Lille, France) (GECCO '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 812--821.
[40]
Leonardo Vanneschi. 2017. An Introduction to Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 3--42.
[41]
Leonardo Vanneschi and Mauro Castelli. 2021. Soft target and functional complexity reduction: A hybrid regularization method for genetic programming. Expert Systems with Applications 177 (2021), 114929.
[42]
Leonardo Vanneschi, Mauro Castelli, Ernesto Costa, Alessandro Re, Henrique Vaz, Victor Lobo, and Paulo Urbano. 2015. Improving Maritime Awareness with Semantic Genetic Programming and Linear Scaling: Prediction of Vessels Position Based on AIS Data. In Applications of Evolutionary Computation, Antonio M. Mora and Giovanni Squillero (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 732--744.
[43]
L Vanneschi, M Castelli, L Manzoni, and S Silva. 2013. A new implementation of geometric semantic GP applied to predicting pharmacokinetic parameters. In Genetic Programming: 16th European Conference, EuroGP 2013, Vienna, Austria, April 3--5, 2013. Proceedings, Vol. 7831. Springer Berlin, Germany, 205--216.
[44]
Leonardo Vanneschi, Sara Silva, Mauro Castelli, and Luca Manzoni. 2014. Geometric Semantic Genetic Programming for Real Life Applications. Springer New York, New York, NY, 191--209.
[45]
Marco Virgolin, Tanja Alderliesten, Arjan Bel, Cees Witteveen, and Peter A. N. Bosman. 2018. Symbolic Regression and Feature Construction with GP-GOMEA Applied to Radiotherapy Dose Reconstruction of Childhood Cancer Survivors. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Kyoto, Japan) (GECCO '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1395--1402.
[46]
Marco Virgolin, Tanja Alderliesten, and Peter A. N. Bosman. 2019. Linear Scaling with and within Semantic Backpropagation-Based Genetic Programming for Symbolic Regression. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Prague, Czech Republic) (GECCO '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1084--1092.
[47]
John Woodward, Simon Martin, and Jerry Swan. 2014. Benchmarks That Matter for Genetic Programming. In Proceedings of the Companion Publication of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (GECCO Comp '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1397--1404.
[48]
I.-C. Yeh. 1998. Modeling of strength of high-performance concrete using artificial neural networks. Cement and Concrete Research 28, 12 (1998), 1797--1808.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Automatic design of interpretable control laws through parametrized Genetic Programming with adjoint state method gradient evaluationApplied Soft Computing10.1016/j.asoc.2024.111654159(111654)Online publication date: Jul-2024
  • (2024)Geometric semantic GP with linear scaling: Darwinian versus Lamarckian evolutionGenetic Programming and Evolvable Machines10.1007/s10710-024-09488-025:2Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
GECCO '23: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
July 2023
1667 pages
ISBN:9798400701191
DOI:10.1145/3583131
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: 12 July 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. symbolic regression
  2. geometric semantic genetic programming
  3. linear scaling
  4. genetic programming

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

GECCO '23
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)71
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4
Reflects downloads up to 30 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Automatic design of interpretable control laws through parametrized Genetic Programming with adjoint state method gradient evaluationApplied Soft Computing10.1016/j.asoc.2024.111654159(111654)Online publication date: Jul-2024
  • (2024)Geometric semantic GP with linear scaling: Darwinian versus Lamarckian evolutionGenetic Programming and Evolvable Machines10.1007/s10710-024-09488-025:2Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024

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