Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

How landscape ruggedness influences the performance of real-coded algorithms: a comparative study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ruggedness has a strong influence on the performance of algorithms, but it has been barely studied in real-coded optimization, mainly because of the difficulty of isolating it from a number of involved topological properties. In this paper, we propose a framework consisting of increasing ruggedness function sets built by a mechanism which generates multiple funnels. This mechanism introduces different levels of sinusoidal distortion which can be controlled to isolate the singular influence of some related features. Some commonly used measures of ruggedness have been applied to analyze these sets of functions, and a numerical study to compare the performance of some representative algorithms has been carried out. The results confirm that ruggedness has an influence on the performance of the algorithm, proving that it depends on the multi-funnel structure and peak features, such as height and relative size of the global peak, and not on the number of peaks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Ahn CW, Ramakrishna RS (2008) On the scalability of real-coded bayesian optimization algorithm. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 12(3):307–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angel E, Zissimopoulos V (2000) On the classification of NP-complete problems in terms of their correlation coefficient. Discret Appl Math 99:261–277

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Auger A, Hansen N (2005) A restart CMA evolution strategy with increasing population size. In: Evolutionary Computation, 2005. The 2005 IEEE Congress, vol 2, pp 1769–1776

  • Barnett L (1998) Ruggedness and neutrality—the NKp family of fitness landscapes. In: ALIFE: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on Artificial life, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, pp 18–27

  • Campos PRA, Adami C, Wilke CO (2002) Optimal adaptive performance and delocalization in NK fitness landscapes. Phys A 304(3–4):495–506

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Conover W (1980) Practical nonparametric statistics, 2nd edn. Wiley series in probability and mathematical statistics, Wiley, New York

  • Cox DR; Lewis PAW(1966) The statistical analysis of series of events. Chapman and Hall, London

  • Davidor Y (1990) Epistasis variance: a viewpoint on GA-hardness. In: FOGA, pp 23–35

  • Doye JPK, Leary RH, Locatelli M, Schoen F (2004) Global optimization of morse clusters by potential energy transformations. INFORMS J Comput 16:371–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eshelman L (1990) The CHC adaptive search algorithm. In: Rawlins G (ed) Foudations of Genetic Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, NJ, pp 265–283

  • Eshelman L, Caruana A, Schaffer J (1993) Real-coded genetic algorithms and interval-schemata. Found Genet algorithms 2:187–202

    Google Scholar 

  • García S, Molina D, Lozano M, Herrera F (2009) A study on the use of non-parametric tests for analyzing the evolutionary algorithms’ behaviour: a case study on the CEC’2005 special session on real parameter optimization. J Heuristics 15(6):617–644

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • García-Martínez C, Lozano M (2009) Continuous variable neighbourhood search algorithm based on evolutionary metaheuristic components: a scalability test. In: ISDA’09: Proceedings of the 2009 Ninth International Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp 1074–1079

  • Hansen N (2006) The CMA evolution strategy: a comparing review. In: Lozano J, Larrañaga P, Inza I, Bengoetxea E (eds) Towards a new evolutionary computation. Advances on estimation of distribution algorithms, Springer, Berlin, pp 75–102

  • Hansen N (2010) CMA evolution strategy source code. http://www.lri.fr/hansen/cmaesintro.html

  • Hansen N, Kern S (2004) Evaluating the CMA evolution strategy on multimodal test functions. In: Yao X, et al. (eds) Parallel Problem Solving from Nature PPSN VIII. LNCS, vol 3242. Springer, Berlin, pp 282–291

  • Hansen N, Ostermeier A (2001) Completely derandomized self-adaptation in evolution strategies. Evol Comput 9(2):159–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez-Aguirre A, Martinez-Alcantara A (2000) The probably approximately correct (PAC) population size of a genetic algorithm. In: ICTAI’00: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp 199–202

  • Hordijk W, Kauffman SA (2005) Correlation analysis of coupled fitness landscapes: research articles. Complexity 10(6):41–49

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Horn J, Goldberg DE (1994) Genetic algorithm difficulty and the modality of fitness landscapes. In: FOGA, pp 243–269

  • Kallel L, Naudts B, Reeves CR (2001) Properties of fitness functions and search landscapes, Springer-Verlag, London, pp 175–206

  • Klemm K, Flamm C, Stadler PF (2008) Funnels in energy landscapes. Eur Phys J B Condens Matter Complex Syst 63(3):387–391

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Leary RH (2000) Global optimization on funneling landscapes. J Glob Optim 18(4):367–383

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Li J, Rhinehart R (1998) Heuristic random optimization. Comput Chem Eng 22(3):427–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano M, Molina D, García-Martínez C, Herrera F (2010) Evolutionary algorithms and other metaheuristics for continuous optimization problems. http://sci2s.ugr.es/EAMHCO/

  • Lunacek M, Whitley D, Sutton A (2008) The impact of global structure on search. In: Rudolph G, Jansen T, Lucas S, Poloni C, Beume N (eds) Parallel Problem Solving from Nature PPSN X, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5199. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 498–507

  • Malan KM, Engelbrecht AP (2009) Quantifying ruggedness of continuous landscapes using entropy. In: CEC’09: Proceedings of the Eleventh conference on Congress on Evolutionary Computation, IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, pp 1440–1447

  • Marín J, Solé RV (1999) Macroevolutionary algorithms: a new optimization method on fitness landscapes. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3(4):272–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalewicz Z (1996) Genetic algorithms + data structures = evolution programs, 3rd edn. Springer-Verlag, London, UK

  • Müller CL, Sbalzarini IF (2009) A tunable real-world multi-funnel benchmark problem for evolutionary optimization—and why parallel island models might remedy the failure of CMA-ES on it. In: IJCCI 2009. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Computational Intelligence, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal, October 5–7, pp 248–253

  • Nelder JA, Mead R (1965) A simplex method for function minimization. Comput J 7:308–313

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Pardalos PM, Schoen F (2004) Recent advances and ternds in global optimization: deterministic and stochastic methods. In: Floudas CA, Agrawal R (eds) Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Foundations of Computer-Aided Process Design, Austin, TX, DSI 1-2004, pp 119–131

  • Preuss M (2006) Niching prospects. In: Filipic B, Silc J (eds) In: Proceedings of Bioinspired Optimization Methods and their Applications (BIOMA 2006), Jozef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia, pp 25–34

  • Price K, Storn R (2011) DE differential evolution source code. http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/storn/code.html

  • Richter H (2008) Coupled map lattices as spatio-temporal fitness functions: landscape measures and evolutionary optimization. Phys D 237:167–186

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rönkkönen J, Li X, Kyrki V, Lampinen J (2008) A generator for multimodal test functions with multiple global optima. In: Li X, Kirley M, Zhang M, Green D, Ciesielski V, Abbass H, Michalewicz Z, Hendtlass T, Deb K, Tan K, Branke J, Shi Y (eds) Simulated Evolution and Learning, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5361. Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 239–248

  • Ros R (2010) Black-Box Optimization Benchmarking the IPOP-CMA-ES on the Noiseless Testbed. In: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference 2010, Portland, OR, US, pp 1503–1510

  • Solis FJ, Wets RJB (1981) Minimization by random search techniques. Math Oper Res 6(1):19–30

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Stadler PF, Stephens CR (2003) Landscapes and effective fitness. Comments Theor Biol 8(4):389–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution—a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Glob Optim 11(4):341–359

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton AM, Whitley D, Lunacek M, Howe A (2006) Pso and multi-funnel landscapes: how cooperation might limit exploration. In: Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, GECCO’06. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 75–82

  • Vassilev VK, Fogarty TC, Miller JF (2003) Smoothness, ruggedness and neutrality of fitness landscapes: from theory to application. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger E (1990) Correlated and uncorrelated fitness landscapes and how to tell the difference. Biol Cybern 63(5):325–336

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J, Yuan X, Buckles BP (2003) Population sizing based on landscape feature. In: GECCO’03: Proceedings of the 2003 international conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 1624–1625

  • Zhao SZ, Suganthan P, Das S (2010) Self-adaptive differential evolution with multi-trajectory search for large-scale optimization. Soft Comput 15(11):2175–2185. doi:10.1007/s00500-010-0645-4

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (Spain) under grant TEC2008-02754/TEC.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Automatic Control (ESAII), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, EUETIB, Urgell 187, 08036, Barcelona, Spain

    Jesús Marín

Authors
  1. Jesús Marín
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jesús Marín.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marín, J. How landscape ruggedness influences the performance of real-coded algorithms: a comparative study. Soft Comput 16, 683–698 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-011-0781-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-011-0781-5

Keywords