Productive Recombination and Propagating and Preserving Schemata

Stochastic sampling algorithms, the class to which genetic algorithms (GAs) belong, may be characterized by their sampling biases. A stronger bias will generally yield more efficient search, and thus better function optimization, but on a smaller class of problems than a weaker bias. We identify two biases for studying crossover operators—recombinative bias and schema bias—and demonstrate how they affect GA performance on specific problem classes. We show how a combination of high recombinative bias and low schema bias can combat premature convergence due to hitchhiking. However, high recombinative bias can be a liability for problems with competing conventions or traps. Competing conventions are a crossover-frustrating form of multimodality introduced by the representation. Traps lead to a phenomenon analogous to Gresham's Law in Economics where bad schemata drive out good schemata. We argue that it is susceptibility to this phenomenon that predicts whether a GA will be mislead and not the property of being fully deceptive. Finally, we present a method for automatically adapting the recombinative bias to the function being optimized.

[1]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A Comparative Analysis of Selection Schemes Used in Genetic Algorithms , 1990, FOGA.

[2]  L. Darrell Whitley,et al.  The GENITOR Algorithm and Selection Pressure: Why Rank-Based Allocation of Reproductive Trials is Best , 1989, ICGA.

[3]  Larry J. Eshelman,et al.  The CHC Adaptive Search Algorithm: How to Have Safe Search When Engaging in Nontraditional Genetic Recombination , 1990, FOGA.

[4]  Gilbert Syswerda,et al.  A Study of Reproduction in Generational and Steady State Genetic Algorithms , 1990, FOGA.

[5]  Thomas Bäck,et al.  A Survey of Evolution Strategies , 1991, ICGA.

[6]  Nicholas J. Radcliffe,et al.  Forma Analysis and Random Respectful Recombination , 1991, ICGA.

[7]  Lawrence Davis,et al.  Adapting Operator Probabilities in Genetic Algorithms , 1989, ICGA.

[8]  Rajarshi Das,et al.  A Study of Control Parameters Affecting Online Performance of Genetic Algorithms for Function Optimization , 1989, ICGA.

[9]  L. Darrell Whitley,et al.  Fundamental Principles of Deception in Genetic Search , 1990, FOGA.

[10]  Larry J. Eshelman,et al.  Preventing Premature Convergence in Genetic Algorithms by Preventing Incest , 1991, ICGA.

[11]  John J. Grefenstette,et al.  Deception Considered Harmful , 1992, FOGA.

[12]  J. D. Schaffer,et al.  Combinations of genetic algorithms and neural networks: a survey of the state of the art , 1992, [Proceedings] COGANN-92: International Workshop on Combinations of Genetic Algorithms and Neural Networks.

[13]  Larry J. Eshelman,et al.  Spurious Correlations and Premature Convergence in Genetic Algorithms , 1990, FOGA.

[14]  Kenneth A. De Jong,et al.  An Analysis of Multi-Point Crossover , 1990, FOGA.

[15]  GUNAR E. LIEPINS,et al.  Representational issues in genetic optimization , 1990, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[16]  D. E. Goldberg,et al.  Simple Genetic Algorithms and the Minimal, Deceptive Problem , 1987 .

[17]  Dirk Thierens,et al.  Mixing in Genetic Algorithms , 1993, ICGA.