Substructural Neighborhoods for Local Search in the Bayesian Optimization Algorithm

This paper studies the utility of using substructural neighborhoods for local search in the Bayesian optimization algorithm (BOA). The probabilistic model of BOA, which automatically identifies important problem substructures, is used to define the structure of the neighborhoods used in local search. Additionally, a surrogate fitness model is considered to evaluate the improvement of the local search steps. The results show that performing substructural local search in BOA significatively reduces the number of generations necessary to converge to optimal solutions and thus provides substantial speedups.

[1]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Let's Get Ready to Rumble: Crossover Versus Mutation Head to Head , 2004, GECCO.

[2]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Scalability of the Bayesian optimization algorithm , 2002, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[3]  D. Goldberg,et al.  BOA: the Bayesian optimization algorithm , 1999 .

[4]  G. Harik Linkage Learning via Probabilistic Modeling in the ECGA , 1999 .

[5]  G. Schwarz Estimating the Dimension of a Model , 1978 .

[6]  Natalio Krasnogor,et al.  Studies on the theory and design space of memetic algorithms , 2002 .

[7]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems - networks of plausible inference , 1991, Morgan Kaufmann series in representation and reasoning.

[8]  W. Hart Adaptive global optimization with local search , 1994 .

[9]  Martin Pelikan,et al.  Hierarchical Bayesian optimization algorithm: toward a new generation of evolutionary algorithms , 2010, SICE 2003 Annual Conference (IEEE Cat. No.03TH8734).

[10]  L. D. Whitley,et al.  Empirical modeling and analysis of local search algorithms for the job-shop scheduling problem , 2003 .

[11]  J. Wesley Barnes,et al.  The theory of elementary landscapes , 2003, Appl. Math. Lett..

[12]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Combining competent crossover and mutation operators: a probabilistic model building approach , 2005, GECCO '05.

[13]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Bayesian Optimization Algorithm, Population Sizing, and Time to Convergence , 2000, GECCO.

[14]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Analyzing Deception in Trap Functions , 1992, FOGA.

[15]  Schloss Birlinghoven,et al.  How Genetic Algorithms Really Work I.mutation and Hillclimbing , 2022 .

[16]  Pablo Moscato,et al.  On Evolution, Search, Optimization, Genetic Algorithms and Martial Arts : Towards Memetic Algorithms , 1989 .

[17]  Fernando G. Lobo,et al.  A parameter-less genetic algorithm , 1999, GECCO.

[18]  Peter Merz,et al.  Memetic algorithms for combinatorial optimization problems : fitness landscapes and effective search strategies , 2006 .

[19]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Designing Competent Mutation Operators Via Probabilistic Model Building of Neighborhoods , 2004, GECCO.

[20]  Gregory F. Cooper,et al.  A Bayesian method for the induction of probabilistic networks from data , 1992, Machine Learning.

[21]  David Maxwell Chickering,et al.  Learning Bayesian Networks: The Combination of Knowledge and Statistical Data , 1994, Machine Learning.

[22]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  A Survey of Optimization by Building and Using Probabilistic Models , 2002, Comput. Optim. Appl..

[23]  Heinz Mühlenbein,et al.  How Genetic Algorithms Really Work: Mutation and Hillclimbing , 1992, PPSN.

[24]  Hisashi Handa The effectiveness of mutation operation in the case of Estimation of Distribution Algorithms , 2007, Biosyst..

[25]  Riccardo Poli,et al.  Genetic and Evolutionary Computation – GECCO 2004 , 2004, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[26]  J. A. Lozano,et al.  Estimation of Distribution Algorithms: A New Tool for Evolutionary Computation , 2001 .

[27]  Martin Pelikan,et al.  Fitness Inheritance in the Bayesian Optimization Algorithm , 2004, GECCO.