Abstract
Coevolutionary algorithms offer great promise as adaptive problem solvers but suffer from several known pathologies. Historically, spatially embedded coevolutionary algorithms seem to have succeeded where other coevolutionary approaches fail; however, explanations for this have been largely unexplored. We examine this idea more closely by looking at spatial models in the context of a particular coevolutionary pathology: loss of gradient. We believe that loss of gradient in cooperative coevolution is caused by asymmetries in the problem or initial conditions between populations, driving one population to convergence before another. Spatial models seem to lock populations together in terms of evolutionary change, helping establish a type of dynamic balance to thwart loss of gradient. We construct a tunably asymmetric function optimization problem domain and conduct an empirical study to justify this assertion. We find that spatial restrictions for collaboration and selection can help keep population changes balanced when presented with severe asymmetries in the problem.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Cliff, D., Miller, G.F.: Tracking the red queen: Measurements of adaptive progress in co–evolutionary sumulations. In: Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Artificial Life, pp. 200–218. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)
Wiegand, R.P.: An Analysis of Cooperative Coevolutionary Algorithms. PhD thesis, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia (2004)
Nuismer, S.L., Thompson, J.N., Gomulkiewicz, R.: Coevolution between hosts and parasites with partially overlapping geographic ranges. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16, 1337–1345 (2003)
Sarma, J.: An Analysis of Decentralized and Spatially Distributed Genetic Algorithms. PhD thesis, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia (1998)
Pagie, L.: Information Integration in Evolutionary Processes. PhD thesis, Universiteit Utrecht, Netherlands (1999)
Husbands, P., Mill, F.: Simulated coevolution as the mechanism for emergent planning and scheduling. In: Belew, R., Booker, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourch International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pp. 264–270. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1991)
Potter, M.: The Design and Analysis of a Computational Model of Cooperative CoEvolution. PhD thesis, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia (1997)
Moriarty, D., Miikkulainen, R.: Forming neural networks through efficient and adaptive coevolution. Evolutionary Computation 5, 373–399 (1997)
Juillé, H., Pollack, J.: Coevolving the “ideal” trainer: Application to the discovery of cellular automata rules. In: Proceedings of the Third Annual Genetic Programming Conference, Madison, Wisconsin (1998)
Ficici, S., Pollack, J.: Challenges in coevolutionary learning: Arms–race dynamics, open– endedness, and mediocre stable states. In: A., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Life, pp. 238–247. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)
Watson, R., Pollack, J.: Coevolutionary dynamics in a minimal substrate. In: Spector, L., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO 2001), pp. 702–709. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2001)
Bucci, A., Pollack, J.B.: Focusing versus intransitivity geometrical aspects of co-evolution. In: [19], pp. 250–261.
Nowak, M., May, R.: Evolutionary games and spatial chaos. Nature 359, 826–829 (1992)
Giacobini, M., Alba, E., Tomassini, M.: Selection intensity in asynchronous cellular evolutionary algorithms. In: [19], pp. 955–966.
Hillis, D.: Co-evolving parasites improve simulated evolution as an optimization procedure. Artificial Life II, SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity 10, 313–324 (1991)
Husbands, P.: Distributed coevolutionary genetic algorithms for multi–criteria and multiconstraint optimisation. In: Evolutionary Computing, AISB Workshop for Selected Papers, pp. 150–165. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)
Ronge, A., Nordahl, M.G.: Genetic programs and co-evolution developing robust general purpose controllers using local mating in two dimensional populations. In: Ebeling, W., Rechenberg, I., Voigt, H.-M., Schwefel, H.-P. (eds.) PPSN 1996. LNCS, vol. 1141, pp. 81–90. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)
Cartlidge, J., Bullock, S.: Caring versus sharing: How to maintain engagement and diversity in coevolutionary populations. In: Proceedings from Seventh International Conference on Evolutionary Computation and Artificial Life (2003)
Cantú-Paz, E., et al. (eds.): GECCO 2003. LNCS, vol. 2724. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wiegand, R.P., Sarma, J. (2004). Spatial Embedding and Loss of Gradient in Cooperative Coevolutionary Algorithms. In: Yao, X., et al. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature - PPSN VIII. PPSN 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3242. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30217-9_92
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30217-9_92
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-23092-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-30217-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive