Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Real-valued genetic algorithms with disagreements

  • Regular Research Paper
  • Published:
Memetic Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents a composite mutation operator for real-valued genetic algorithms that refines the evolutionary process using the so-called “disagreements”. The idea is theoretically described and exemplified by defining a Gaussian scheme-based disagreements operator, called 6 \({\upsigma }\) -GAD. Several tests empirically prove some advantages of this simple approach that enhances diversity and search focus.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This paper is an improved and a more elaborate version of our previously published article, [20].

References

  1. Acemoglu D, Chernozhukov V, Yildiz M (2006) Learning and disagreement in an uncertain world. NBER Working Papers 12648, National Bureau of Economic Research Inc

  2. Acemoglu D, Como G, Fagnani F, Ozdaglar A (2010) Opinion fluctuations and disagreement in social networks. CoRR, abs/1009.2653

  3. Acemoglu D, Ozdaglar A, Gheibi AP (2009) Spread of misinformation in social networks. CoRR, abs/0906.5007

  4. Bäck T, Fogel D, Michalewicz Z (eds) (2000) Evolutionary Computation 1: basic algorithms and operators. Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol

  5. Bremermann H (1958) The evolution of intelligence: the nervous system as a model of its environment. University of Washington, Dept. of Mathematics

  6. Chia JY, Goh CK, Tan KC, Shim VA (2011) Memetic informed evolutionary optimization via data mining. Memet Comput 3(2):73–87

    Google Scholar 

  7. Darwin C (1859) On the origin of species by means of natural selection. Murray, London

  8. Deb K (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Deb K, Agrawal R (1994) Simulated binary crossover for continuous search space. Technical report, Departement of Mechanical Enginering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur

  10. Deep K, Thakur M (2007) A new mutation operator for real coded genetic algorithms. Appl Math Comput 193(1):211–230

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Eiben AE, Smith JE (2003) Introduction to evolutionary computing. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Eshelman L, Schaffer J (1992) FOGA. In: Whitley L (ed) Real-coded genetic algorithms and interval-schemata. Morgan Kaufmann, pp 187–202

  13. Fraser AS (1960) Simulation of genetic systems by automatic digital computers. III. Epistasis. Aust J Biol Sci 13:329–346

    Google Scholar 

  14. 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 

  15. Goldberg D (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine learning, 1st edn. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston

  16. Herrera F, Lozano M (2000) Two-loop real-coded genetic algorithms with adaptive control of mutation step sizes. Appl Intell 13(3):187–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Holland J (1975) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor

  18. Kelly JD, Davis L (1991) IJCAI. In: Mylopoulos J, Reiter R (eds) A hybrid genetic algorithm for classification. Morgan Kaufmann, pp 645–650

  19. Lihu A (2012) Disagreements—a new social concept in swarm intelligence and evolutionary computation. PhD thesis, Politehnica University of Timişoara, Romania

  20. Lihu A, Holban C (2011) Real-valued genetic algorithms with disagreements. In: Pelta D, Krasnogor N, Dumitrescu D, Chira C, Lung R (eds) NICSO, Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 387. Springer, Berlin, pp 333–346

  21. Lihu A, Holban S (2011) Particle swarm optimization with disagreements. In: Tan Y, Tan Y, Shi Y, Chai Y, Wang G (eds) ICSI(1), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6728. Springer, Berlin, pp 46–55

  22. Lihu A, Holban S (2011) Particle swarm optimization with disagreements on stagnation. In: Katarzyniak R, Chiu T, Hong C, Nguyen N (eds) Semantic methods for knowledge management and communication, Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 381. Springer, New York, pp 103–113

  23. McDonnell J, Reynolds R, Fogel D (1995) Evolutionary programming 4. Complex adaptive systems. Mit Press, Cambridge

  24. Moscato P (1989) On evolution, search, optimization, genetic algorithms and martial arts: Towards memetic algorithms. Technical Report C3P Report 826, California Institute of Technology

  25. Mühlenbein H, Schlierkamp-Voosen D (1993) Predictive models for the breeder genetic algorithm. I. continuous parameter optimization. Evol. Comput. 1:25–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Panneton F, L’Ecuyer P, Matsumoto M (2006) Improved long-period generators based on linear recurrences modulo 2. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 32(1):1–16

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Suganthan PN, Hansen N, Liang JJ, Deb K, Chen YP, Auger A, Tiwari S (2005) Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2005 special session on real parameter optimization. Nanyang Technological University Technical report

  28. Van Den Bergh F (2002) An analysis of particle swarm optimizers. PhD thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

  29. Voigt H-M, Anheyer T (1994) Modal mutations in evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of the first IEEE conference on evolutionary computation, 1994, vol 1. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, pp 88–92

  30. Xing L-N, Chen Y-W, Yang K-W (2009) A novel mutation operator based on the immunity operation. Eur J Oper Res 197(2):830–833

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the strategic grant POSDRU 6/1.5/S/13, Project ID6998 (2008), co-financed by the European Social Fund Investing in People, within the Sectorial Operational Programme Human Resources Development 2007-2013.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Politehnica University of Timişoara, Bd. Vasile Pârvan 2, 300223 , Timişoara, Romania

    Andrei Lihu, Ştefan Holban & Oana-Andreea Popescu

Authors
  1. Andrei Lihu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ştefan Holban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Oana-Andreea Popescu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Andrei Lihu or Oana-Andreea Popescu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lihu, A., Holban, Ş. & Popescu, OA. Real-valued genetic algorithms with disagreements. Memetic Comp. 4, 317–325 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12293-012-0098-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12293-012-0098-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation