Fitness inheritance in the Bayesian optimization algorithm

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    1 Group

    Fitness inheritance in the Bayesian optimization algorithm - Presentation Transcript

    1. Fitness Inheritance in BOA Martin Pelikan Kumara Sastry Dept. of Math and CS Illinois GA Lab Univ. of Missouri at St. Louis Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1
    2. Motivation Bayesian optimization algorithm (BOA) Scales up on decomposable problems O(n)-O(n2) evaluations until convergence Expensive evaluations Real-world evaluations can be complex FEA, simulation, … O(n2) is often not enough This paper Extend probabilistic model to include fitness info Use model to evaluate part of the population 2
    3. Outline BOA basics Fitness inheritance in BOA Extend Bayesian networks with fitness. Use extended model for evaluation. Experiments Future work Summary and conclusions 3
    4. Bayesian Optimization Alg. (BOA) Pelikan, Goldberg, and Cantu-Paz (1998) Similar to genetic algorithms (GAs) Replace mutation + crossover by Build Bayesian network to model selected solutions. Sample Bayesian network to generate new candidate solutions. 4
    5. BOA Bayesian New Current network Selection population population Restricted tournament replacement 5
    6. Bayesian Networks (BNs) 2 components Structure directed acyclic graph nodes = variables (string positions) Edges = dependencies between variables Parameters Conditional probabilities p(X|Px), where X is a variable Px are parents of X (variables that X depends on) 6
    7. BN example A B p(A|B) 0 0 0.10 0 1 0.60 A 1 0 0.90 1 1 0.40 B C C A p(C|A) 0 0 0.80 0 1 0.55 B p(B) 1 0 0.20 0 0.25 1 1 0.45 1 0.75 7
    8. Extending BNs with fitness info A B p(A|B) f(A|B) Basic idea 0 0 0.10 -0.5 Don’t work only with conditional probabilities 0 1 0.60 0.5 Add also fitness info for 1 0 0.90 0.3 fitness estimation 1 1 0.40 -0.3 Fitness info attached to p(X|Px) denoted by f(X|Px) Contribution of X restricted by Px f (X = x | Px = px ) = f (X = x, Px = px ) − f (Px = px ) f (X = x, Px = px ) avg. fitness of solutions with X=x and Px=px f (Px = px ) avg. fitness of solutions with Px 8
    9. Estimating fitness Equation ( ) n f (X1 , X2 ,K , X n ) = favg + ∑ f Xi | PXi i=0 In words Fitness = avg. fitness + avg. contribution of each bit Avg. contributions taken w.r.t. context from BN 9
    10. BNs with decision trees Local structures in BNs More efficient representation for p ( X | Px ) Example for p ( A | B C ) B 0 1 p( A | B = 0) C 0 1 p( A | B = 1, C = 0 ) p( A | B = 1, C = 1) 10
    11. BNs with decision trees + fitness Same idea Attach fitness info to each probability B 0 1 p( A | B = 0) C f ( A | B = 0) 0 1 p ( A | B = 1, C = 0) p ( A | B = 1, C = 1) f ( A | B = 1, C = 0) f ( A | B = 1, C = 1) 11
    12. Estimating fitness again Same as before…because both BNs represent the same Equation ( ) n f ( X 1 , X 2 ,K , X n ) = f avg + ∑ f X i | PX i i =0 In words Fitness = avg. fitness + avg. contribution of each bit Avg. contributions taken w.r.t. context from BN 12
    13. Where to learn fitness from? Evaluate entire initial population Choose inheritance proportion, pi After that Evaluate (1-pi) proportion of offspring Use evaluated parents + evaluated offspring to learn Estimate fitness of the remaining prop. pi Sample for learning: N(1-pi) to N+N(1-pi) Often, 2N(1-pi) 13
    14. Simple example: Onemax Onemax n f ( X 1 , X 2 ,K , X n ) = ∑ X i i =1 What happens? Average fitness grows (as predicted by theory) No context is necessary Fitness contributions stay constant f ( X i = 1) = +0.5 f ( X i = 0 ) = −0.5 14
    15. Experiments Problems 50-bit onemax 10 traps of order 4 10 traps of order 5 Settings Inheritance proportion from 0 to 0.999 Minimum population size for reliable convergence Many runs for each setting (300 runs for each setting) Output Speed-up (in terms of real fitness evaluations) 15
    16. Onemax 35 Speed-up (w.r.t. no inheritance) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Proportion inherited 16
    17. Trap-4 35 Speed-up (w.r.t. no inheritance) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Proportion inherited 17
    18. Trap-5 60 Speed-up (w.r.t. no inheritance) 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Proportion inherited 18
    19. Discussion Inheritance proportion High proportions of inheritance work great. Speed-up Optimal speed-up of 30-53 High speed-up for almost any setting The tougher the problem, the better the speed-up Why so good? Learning probabilistic model difficult, so accurate fitness info can be added at not much extra cost. 19
    20. Conclusions Fitness inheritance works great in BOA Theory now exists (Satry et al., 2004) that explains these results High proportions of inheritance lead to high speed-ups Challenging problems allow much speed-up Useful for practitioners with computationally complex fitness function 20
    21. Contact Martin Pelikan Dept. of Math and Computer Science, 320 CCB University of Missouri at St. Louis 8001 Natural Bridge Rd. St. Louis, MO 63121 E-mail: pelikan@cs.umsl.edu WWW: http://www.cs.umsl.edu/~pelikan/ 21

    + pelikanpelikan, 3 years ago

    custom

    1052 views, 0 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    This paper describes how fitness inheritance can be more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 1052
      • 1052 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 0
    • Downloads 22
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories