Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3638529.3654030acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Evolving Form and Function: Dual-Objective Optimization in Neural Symbolic Regression Networks

Published: 14 July 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Data increasingly abounds, but distilling their underlying relationships down to something interpretable remains challenging. One approach is genetic programming, which 'symbolically regresses' a data set down into an equation. However, symbolic regression (SR) faces the issue of requiring training from scratch for each new dataset. To generalize across all datasets, deep learning techniques have been applied to SR. These networks, however, are only able to be trained using a symbolic objective: NN-generated and target equations are symbolically compared. But this does not consider the predictive power of these equations, which could be measured by a behavioral objective that compares the generated equation's predictions to actual data. Here we introduce a method that combines gradient descent and evolutionary computation to yield neural networks that minimize the symbolic and behavioral errors of the equations they generate from data. As a result, these evolved networks are shown to generate more symbolically and behaviorally accurate equations than those generated by networks trained by state-of-the-art gradient based neural symbolic regression methods. We hope this method suggests that evolutionary algorithms, combined with gradient descent, can improve SR results by yielding equations with more accurate form and function.

References

[1]
Ignacio Arnaldo, Krzysztof Krawiec, and Una-May O'Reilly. 2014. Multiple regression genetic programming. In Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. 879--886.
[2]
Tommaso Bendinelli, Luca Biggio, and Pierre-Alexandre Kamienny. 2023. Controllable Neural Symbolic Regression. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.10336 (2023).
[3]
Amanda Bertschinger, Q Tyrell Davis, James Bagrow, and Joshua Bongard. 2023. The Metric is the Message: Benchmarking Challenges for Neural Symbolic Regression. In Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Springer, 161--177.
[4]
Luca Biggio, Tommaso Bendinelli, Aurelien Lucchi, and Giambattista Parascandolo. 2020. A seq2seq approach to symbolic regression. In Learning Meets Combinatorial Algorithms at NeurIPS2020.
[5]
Luca Biggio, Tommaso Bendinelli, Alexander Neitz, Aurelien Lucchi, and Giambattista Parascandolo. 2021. Neural symbolic regression that scales. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 936--945.
[6]
Subhodip Biswas, Debanjan Saha, Shuvodeep De, Adam D Cobb, Swagatam Das, and Brian A Jalaian. 2021. Improving differential evolution through Bayesian hyperparameter optimization. In 2021 IEEE Congress on evolutionary computation (CEC). IEEE, 832--840.
[7]
N Boddupalli, T Matchen, and J Moehlis. 2023. Symbolic regression via neural networks. Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science 33, 8 (2023).
[8]
Jeff Clune, Jean-Baptiste Mouret, and Hod Lipson. 2013. The evolutionary origins of modularity. Proceedings of the Royal Society b: Biological sciences 280, 1755 (2013), 20122863.
[9]
Allan Costa, Rumen Dangovski, Owen Dugan, Samuel Kim, Pawan Goyal, Marin Soljačić, and Joseph Jacobson. 2020. Fast neural models for symbolic regression at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.10784 (2020).
[10]
Miles Cranmer. 2023. Interpretable machine learning for science with PySR and SymbolicRegression. jl. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.01582 (2023).
[11]
Shifei Ding, Hui Li, Chunyang Su, Junzhao Yu, and Fengxiang Jin. 2013. Evolutionary artificial neural networks: a review. Artificial Intelligence Review 39 (2013), 251--260.
[12]
Kai Olav Ellefsen, Jean-Baptiste Mouret, and Jeff Clune. 2015. Neural modularity helps organisms evolve to learn new skills without forgetting old skills. PLoS computational biology 11, 4 (2015), e1004128.
[13]
Matthias Feurer and Frank Hutter. 2019. Hyperparameter optimization. Automated machine learning: Methods, systems, challenges (2019), 3--33.
[14]
Philipp Fleck, Bernhard Werth, and Michael Affenzeller. 2024. Population Dynamics in Genetic Programming for Dynamic Symbolic Regression. Applied Sciences 14, 2 (2024), 596.
[15]
Dario Floreano, Peter Dürr, and Claudio Mattiussi. 2008. Neuroevolution: from architectures to learning. Evolutionary intelligence 1 (2008), 47--62.
[16]
Edgar Galván and Peter Mooney. 2021. Neuroevolution in deep neural networks: Current trends and future challenges. IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence 2, 6 (2021), 476--493.
[17]
C Haider, FO de Franca, B Burlacu, and G Kronberger. 2023. Shape-constrained multi-objective genetic programming for symbolic regression. Applied Soft Computing 132 (2023), 109855.
[18]
Dan Hendrycks and Kevin Gimpel. 2016. Gaussian error linear units (gelus). arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.08415 (2016).
[19]
Yaochu Jin and Bernhard Sendhoff. 2009. A systems approach to evolutionary multiobjective structural optimization and beyond. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 4, 3 (2009), 62--76.
[20]
Pierre-Alexandre Kamienny, Stéphane d'Ascoli, Guillaume Lample, and François Charton. 2022. End-to-end symbolic regression with transformers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.10532 (2022).
[21]
Maarten Keijzer. 2003. Improving symbolic regression with interval arithmetic and linear scaling. In European Conference on Genetic Programming. Springer, 70--82.
[22]
Maarten Keijzer. 2004. Scaled symbolic regression. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 5 (2004), 259--269.
[23]
Nitish Shirish Keskar, Bryan McCann, Lav R Varshney, Caiming Xiong, and Richard Socher. 2019. Ctrl: A conditional transformer language model for controllable generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.05858 (2019).
[24]
Samuel Kim, Peter Y Lu, Srijon Mukherjee, Michael Gilbert, Li Jing, Vladimir Čeperić, and Marin Soljačić. 2020. Integration of neural network-based symbolic regression in deep learning for scientific discovery. IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems 32, 9 (2020), 4166--4177.
[25]
J.R. Koza. 1992. Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural Selection. Bradford. https://books.google.com/books?id=Bhtxo60BV0EC
[26]
John R Koza. 1994. Genetic programming II: automatic discovery of reusable programs. MIT press.
[27]
William La Cava, Patryk Orzechowski, Bogdan Burlacu, Fabrício Olivetti de França, Marco Virgolin, Ying Jin, Michael Kommenda, and Jason H Moore. 2021. Contemporary symbolic regression methods and their relative performance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.14351 (2021).
[28]
Wenqiang Li, Weijun Li, Linjun Sun, Min Wu, Lina Yu, Jingyi Liu, Yanjie Li, and Songsong Tian. 2022. Transformer-based model for symbolic regression via joint supervised learning. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations.
[29]
Georg Martius and Christoph H Lampert. 2016. Extrapolation and learning equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.02995 (2016).
[30]
David J Montana, Lawrence Davis, et al. 1989. Training feedforward neural networks using genetic algorithms. In IJCAI, Vol. 89. 762--767.
[31]
Harvey J Motulsky and Lennart A Ransnas. 1987. Fitting curves to data using nonlinear regression: a practical and nonmathematical review. The FASEB journal 1, 5 (1987), 365--374.
[32]
Brenden K Petersen, Mikel Landajuela, T Nathan Mundhenk, Claudio P Santiago, Soo K Kim, and Joanne T Kim. 2019. Deep symbolic regression: Recovering mathematical expressions from data via risk-seeking policy gradients. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.04871 (2019).
[33]
Charles R Qi, Hao Su, Kaichun Mo, and Leonidas J Guibas. 2017. Pointnet: Deep learning on point sets for 3d classification and segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 652--660.
[34]
Alec Radford, Karthik Narasimhan, Tim Salimans, Ilya Sutskever, et al. 2018. Improving language understanding by generative pre-training. (2018).
[35]
Miguel Rocha, Paulo Cortez, and José Neves. 2007. Evolution of neural networks for classification and regression. Neurocomputing 70, 16-18 (2007), 2809--2816.
[36]
Subham Sahoo, Christoph Lampert, and Georg Martius. 2018. Learning equations for extrapolation and control. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 4442--4450.
[37]
Michael Schmidt and Hod Lipson. 2009. Symbolic regression of implicit equations. In Genetic programming theory and practice VII. Springer, 73--85.
[38]
Michael D Schmidt and Hod Lipson. 2008. Coevolution of fitness predictors. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 12, 6 (2008), 736--749.
[39]
Kenneth O Stanley, Jeff Clune, Joel Lehman, and Risto Miikkulainen. 2019. Designing neural networks through neuroevolution. Nature Machine Intelligence 1, 1 (2019), 24--35.
[40]
Kenneth O Stanley and Risto Miikkulainen. 2002. Evolving neural networks through augmenting topologies. Evolutionary computation 10, 2 (2002), 99--127.
[41]
Laurits Tani, Diana Rand, Christian Veelken, and Mario Kadastik. 2021. Evolutionary algorithms for hyperparameter optimization in machine learning for application in high energy physics. The European Physical Journal C 81 (2021), 1--9.
[42]
Mojtaba Valipour, Bowen You, Maysum Panju, and Ali Ghodsi. 2021. SymbolicGPT: A generative transformer model for symbolic regression. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.14131 (2021).
[43]
Martin Vastl, Jonáš Kulhánek, Jirí Kubalík, Erik Derner, and Robert Babuška. 2022. SymFormer: End-to-end symbolic regression using transformer-based architecture. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.15764 (2022).
[44]
Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).
[45]
Marco Virgolin, Tanja Alderliesten, Cees Witteveen, and Peter AN Bosman. 2021. Improving model-based genetic programming for symbolic regression of small expressions. Evolutionary computation 29, 2 (2021), 211--237.
[46]
Chenguang Wang, Mu Li, and Alexander J Smola. 2019. Language models with transformers. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.09408 (2019).
[47]
Sanford Weisberg. 2005. Applied linear regression. Vol. 528. John Wiley & Sons.
[48]
Kaifeng Yang and Michael Affenzeller. 2023. Surrogate-assisted Multi-objective Optimization via Genetic Programming Based Symbolic Regression. In International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization. Springer, 176--190.
[49]
Michael Zhang, Samuel Kim, Peter Y Lu, and Marin Soljačić. 2023. Deep learning and symbolic regression for discovering parametric equations. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems (2023).
[50]
Zahra Zojaji, Mohammad Mehdi Ebadzadeh, and Hamid Nasiri. 2022. Semantic schema based genetic programming for symbolic regression. Applied Soft Computing 122 (2022), 108825.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
GECCO '24: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
July 2024
1657 pages
ISBN:9798400704949
DOI:10.1145/3638529
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs International 4.0 License.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 14 July 2024

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. symbolic regression
  2. neuroevolution
  3. multi-objective optimization

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

GECCO '24
Sponsor:
GECCO '24: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
July 14 - 18, 2024
VIC, Melbourne, Australia

Acceptance Rates

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

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 224
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)224
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)23
Reflects downloads up to 11 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media