Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3299904.3340309acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfogaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Exponential slowdown for larger populations: the (µ + 1)-EA on monotone functions

Published: 27 August 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Pseudo-Boolean monotone functions are unimodal functions which are trivial to optimize for some hillclimbers, but are challenging for a surprising number of evolutionary algorithms. A general trend is that evolutionary algorithms are efficient if parameters like the mutation rate are set conservatively, but may need exponential time otherwise. In particular, it was known that the (1 + 1)-EA and the (1 + λ)-EA can optimize every monotone function in pseudolinear time if the mutation rate is c/n for some c < 1, but that they need exponential time for some monotone functions for c > 2.2. The second part of the statement was also known for the (µ + 1)-EA.
In this paper we show that the first statement does not apply to the (µ + 1)-EA. More precisely, we prove that for every constant c > 0 there is a constant µ0 ∈ N such that the (µ + 1)-EA with mutation rate c/n and population size µ0 ≤ µ ≤ n needs superpolynomial time to optimize some monotone functions. Thus, increasing the population size by just a constant has devastating effects on the performance. This is in stark contrast to many other benchmark functions on which increasing the population size either increases the performance significantly, or affects performance only mildly.
The reason why larger populations are harmful lies in the fact that larger populations may temporarily decrease selective pressure on parts of the population. This allows unfavorable mutations to accumulate in single individuals and their descendants. If the population moves sufficiently fast through the search space, then such unfavorable descendants can become ancestors of future generations, and the bad mutations are preserved. Remarkably, this effect only occurs if the population renews itself sufficiently fast, which can only happen far away from the optimum. This is counter-intuitive since usually optimization becomes harder as we approach the optimum. Previous work missed the effect because it focused on monotone functions that are only deceptively close to the optimum.

References

[1]
Benjamin Doerr. 2018. Probabilistic tools for the analysis of randomized optimization heuristics. arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.06733 (2018).
[2]
Benjamin Doerr, Thomas Jansen, Dirk Sudholt, Carola Winzen, and Christine Zarges. 2010. Optimizing monotone functions can be difficult. In International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature. Springer, 42--51. LNCS 6238.
[3]
Benjamin Doerr, Thomas Jansen, Dirk Sudholt, Carola Winzen, and Christine Zarges. 2013. Mutation rate matters even when optimizing monotonic functions. Evolutionary computation 21, 1 (2013), 1--27.
[4]
Tobias Friedrich, Timo Kötzing, Martin S Krejca, and Andrew M Sutton. 2015. The benefit of recombination in noisy evolutionary search. In International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation. Springer, 140--150.
[5]
Michael Fuchs, Hsien-Kuei Hwang, and Ralph Neininger. 2006. Profiles of random trees: Limit theorems for random recursive trees and binary search trees. Algorithmica 46, 3--4 (2006), 367--407.
[6]
Thomas Jansen. 2007. On the brittleness of evolutionary algorithms. In International Workshop on Foundations of Genetic Algorithms. Springer, 54--69.
[7]
Timo Kötzing. 2016. Concentration of first hitting times under additive drift. Algorithmica 75, 3 (2016), 490--506.
[8]
Timo Kötzing, JA Gregor Lagodzinski, Johannes Lengler, and Anna Melnichenko. 2018. Destructiveness of lexicographic parsimony pressure and alleviation by a concatenation crossover in genetic programming. In International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature. Springer, 42--54. LNCS 11102.
[9]
Timo Kötzing, Dirk Sudholt, and Madeleine Theile. 2011. How crossover helps in pseudo-boolean optimization. In Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. ACM, 989--996.
[10]
L. Le Cam. 1960. An approximation theorem for the Poisson binomial distribution. Pacific J. Math 10, 4 (1960), 1181--1197.
[11]
Per Kristian Lehre and Xin Yao. 2012. On the impact of mutation-selection balance on the runtime of evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 16, 2 (2012), 225--241.
[12]
Johannes Lengler. 2018. A general dichotomy of evolutionary algorithms on monotone functions. In International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature. Springer, 3--15. LNCS 11102.
[13]
Johannes Lengler. 2019. A general dichotomy of evolutionary algorithms on monotone functions. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation (2019), 1--15.
[14]
Johannes Lengler, Anders Martinsson, and Angelika Steger. 2019. When does hillclimbing fail on monotone functions: An entropy compression argument. In Workshop on Analytic Algorithmics and Combinatorics. SIAM, 94--102.
[15]
Johannes Lengler and Ulysse Schaller. 2018. The (1+ 1)-EA on Noisy Linear Functions with Random Positive Weights. In Foundations of Computational Intelligence, in IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence. IEEE, 712--719.
[16]
Johannes Lengler and Angelika Steger. 2018. Drift analysis and evolutionary algorithms revisited. Combinatorics, Probability and Computing 27, 4 (2018), 643--666.
[17]
Chao Qian, Yang Yu, and Zhi-Hua Zhou. 2013. An analysis on recombination in multi-objective evolutionary optimization. Artificial Intelligence 204 (2013), 99--119.
[18]
J Neal Richter, Alden Wright, and John Paxton. 2008. Ignoble trails-where crossover is provably harmful. In International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature. Springer, 92--101. LNCS 5199.
[19]
Dirk Sudholt. 2009. The impact of parametrization in memetic evolutionary algorithms. Theoretical Computer Science 410, 26 (2009), 2511--2528.
[20]
Carsten Witt. 2006. Runtime analysis of the (µ + 1) EA on simple pseudo-Boolean functions. Evolutionary Computation 14, 1 (2006), 65--86.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Empirical Analysis of the Dynamic Binary Value Problem with IOHprofilerParallel Problem Solving from Nature – PPSN XVIII10.1007/978-3-031-70068-2_2(20-35)Online publication date: 7-Sep-2024
  • (2023)Do Additional Target Points Speed Up Evolutionary Algorithms?Theoretical Computer Science10.1016/j.tcs.2023.113757(113757)Online publication date: Mar-2023
  • (2022)Runtime Analysis of the $$(\mu + 1)$$-EA on the Dynamic BinVal FunctionSN Computer Science10.1007/s42979-022-01203-z3:4Online publication date: 10-Jun-2022
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Exponential slowdown for larger populations: the (µ + 1)-EA on monotone functions

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    FOGA '19: Proceedings of the 15th ACM/SIGEVO Conference on Foundations of Genetic Algorithms
    August 2019
    187 pages
    ISBN:9781450362542
    DOI:10.1145/3299904
    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: 27 August 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. evolutionary algorithm
    2. hottopic functions
    3. monotone functions
    4. mutation rate
    5. population
    6. runtime analysis

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung

    Conference

    FOGA '19
    Sponsor:
    FOGA '19: Foundations of Genetic Algorithms XV
    August 27 - 29, 2019
    Potsdam, Germany

    Acceptance Rates

    FOGA '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 15 of 31 submissions, 48%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 72 of 131 submissions, 55%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)6
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
    Reflects downloads up to 27 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Empirical Analysis of the Dynamic Binary Value Problem with IOHprofilerParallel Problem Solving from Nature – PPSN XVIII10.1007/978-3-031-70068-2_2(20-35)Online publication date: 7-Sep-2024
    • (2023)Do Additional Target Points Speed Up Evolutionary Algorithms?Theoretical Computer Science10.1016/j.tcs.2023.113757(113757)Online publication date: Mar-2023
    • (2022)Runtime Analysis of the $$(\mu + 1)$$-EA on the Dynamic BinVal FunctionSN Computer Science10.1007/s42979-022-01203-z3:4Online publication date: 10-Jun-2022
    • (2022)Large population sizes and crossover help in dynamic environmentsNatural Computing10.1007/s11047-022-09915-023:1(115-129)Online publication date: 11-Aug-2022
    • (2021)Do additional optima speed up evolutionary algorithms?Proceedings of the 16th ACM/SIGEVO Conference on Foundations of Genetic Algorithms10.1145/3450218.3477309(1-11)Online publication date: 6-Sep-2021
    • (2021)Self-adjusting population sizes for non-elitist evolutionary algorithmsProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference10.1145/3449639.3459338(1151-1159)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2021
    • (2021)Fixed-Target Runtime AnalysisAlgorithmica10.1007/s00453-021-00881-084:6(1762-1793)Online publication date: 3-Nov-2021
    • (2021)Runtime Analysis of the $$(\mu + 1)$$-EA on the Dynamic BinVal FunctionEvolutionary Computation in Combinatorial Optimization10.1007/978-3-030-72904-2_6(84-99)Online publication date: 27-Mar-2021
    • (2020)Exponential upper bounds for the runtime of randomized search heuristicsTheoretical Computer Science10.1016/j.tcs.2020.09.032Online publication date: Sep-2020
    • (2020)Memetic algorithms outperform evolutionary algorithms in multimodal optimisationArtificial Intelligence10.1016/j.artint.2020.103345(103345)Online publication date: Jun-2020
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media