Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Building-block Identification by Simultaneity Matrix

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

Abstract

This paper presents a study of building blocks (BBs) in the context of genetic algorithms (GAs). In GAs literature, the BBs are common structures of high-quality solutions. The aim is to identify and maintain the BBs while performing solution recombination. To identify the BBs, we construct an \(\ell \times \ell\) simultaneity matrix according to a set of \(\ell\)-bit solutions. The matrix element in row i and column j denoted by m ij is the degree of dependency between bit i and bit j. We search for a partition of \({0, \ldots, \ell-1}\) for the matrix. The main idea of partitioning is to put i and j of which m ij is significantly high in the same partition subset. The partition represents the bit positions of BBs. The partition is exploited in solution recombination so that the bits governed by the same partition subset are passed together. It can be shown that by exploiting the simultaneity matrix the additively decomposable functions can be solved in a polynomial relationship between the number of function evaluations required to reach the optimum and the problem size. A comparison to the Bayesian optimization algorithm (BOA) is made. Empirical results show that the BOA uses less number of function evaluations than that of our algorithm. However, computing the matrix is ten times faster than constructing the Bayesian network.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ackley DH (1987) A connectionist machine for genetic hillclimbing. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aporntewan C, Chongstitvatana P (2003) Building-block identification by simultaneity matrix. In: Cant-úPaz E et al (eds) Proceedings of genetic and evolutionary computation conference. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 1566–1567

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aporntewan C, Chongstitvatana P (2004) Simultaneity matrix for solving hierarchically decomposable functions. In: Deb K et al (eds) Proceedings of genetic and evolutionary computation conference. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 877–888

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baluja S (1994) Population-based incremental learning: a method for integrating genetic search based function optimization and competitive learning. Technical Report CMU-CS-94-163, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA

    Google Scholar 

  5. De Bonet JS, Isbell CL, Viola P (1997) MIMIC: finding optima by estimating probability densities. In: Mozer MC, Jordan MI, Petsche T (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 9. MIT, Cambridge, pp 424–431

    Google Scholar 

  6. De Jong KA, Potter MA, Spears WM (1997) Using problem generators to explore the effects of epistasis. In: Bäck T (eds) Proceedings of the 7th international conference on genetic algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, pp 338–345

    Google Scholar 

  7. Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search optimization and machine learning. Addison Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  8. Goldberg DE, Korb B, Deb K (1989) Messy genetic algorithms: motivation, analysis and first results. In: Wolfram S (eds) Complex systems, vol 3, no 5. Complex Systems Publications Inc., Champaign, pp 493–530

    Google Scholar 

  9. Goldberg DE (2002) The design of innovation: lessons from and for competent genetic algorithms. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  10. Harik GR (1997) Learning linkage. In: Belew RK, Vose MD (eds) Foundation of genetic algorithms 4. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, pp 247–262

    Google Scholar 

  11. Harik GR (1999) Linkage learning via probabilistic modeling in the ECGA. Technical Report 99010, Illinois Genetic Algorithms Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL

  12. Heckerman D, Geiger D, Chickering M (1999) Test function generators as embedded landscapes. In: Banzhaf W, Reeves C (eds) Foundation of genetic algorithms 5. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, pp 183–198

    Google Scholar 

  13. Holland JH (1975) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI

    Google Scholar 

  14. Holland JH (2000) Building blocks, cohort genetic algorithms, and hyperplane-defined functions. In: Whitley D (eds) Evolutionary computation, vol 8, no 4. MIT, Cambridge, pp 373–391

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kargupta H (1996) The gene expression messy genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on evolutionary computation. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 814–819

  16. Kargupta H, Buescher K (1995) The gene expression messy genetic algorithm for financial applications. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/IAFE conference on computational intelligence for financial engineering. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 155–161

  17. Kargupta H et al (1998) Scalable data mining from distributed, heterogeneous data, using collective learning and gene expression based genetic algorithms. WSU Technical Report EECS-98-001, School of EECS, Washington State University, Pullman, WA

  18. Kargupta H, Park B (2001) Gene expression and fast construction of distributed evolutionary representation. In: Whitley D (eds) Evolutionary computation, vol 9, no 1. MIT, Cambridge, pp 43–69

    Google Scholar 

  19. Munetomo M, Goldberg DE (1999). Linkage identification by non-monotonicity detection for overlapping functions. In: Whitley D (eds) Evolutionary computation, vol 7, no 4. MIT, Cambridge, pp 377–398

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mühlenbein H, Mahnig T (1999) FDA – A scalable evolutionary algorithm for the optimization of additively decomposable functions. In: Whitley D (eds) Evolutionary computation, vol 7, no 4. MIT, Cambridge, pp 353–376

    Google Scholar 

  21. Paredis J (1995) The symbiotic evolution of solutions and their representations. In: Eshelman LJ (eds) Proceedings of the 6th international conference on genetic algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, pp 359–365

    Google Scholar 

  22. Pelikan M (1999) A simple implementation of the Bayesian optimization algorithm (BOA) in C++ (version 1.0). Technical Report 99011, Illinois Genetic Algorithms Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL

  23. Pelikan M, Goldberg DE, Cantú-Paz E (1999) BOA: The Bayesian optimization algorithm. In: Banzhaf W et al (eds) Proceedings of genetic and evolutionary computation conference vol 1. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, pp 525–532

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pelikan M, Goldberg DE, Lobo F (1999) A survey of optimization by building and using probabilistic models. In: Hager WW (eds) Computational optimization and applications, vol 21, no 1. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 5–20

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pelikan M (2000) A C++ implementation of the Bayesian optimization algorithm (BOA) with decision graph. Technical Report 2000025, Illinois Genetic Algorithms Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL

  26. Pelikan M (2002) Bayesian optimization algorithm: from single level to hierarchy. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign IL

    Google Scholar 

  27. Pelikan M, Goldberg DE (2003). Hierarchical BOA solves ising spin glasses and MAXSAT. In: Cant-úPaz E et al (eds) Proceedings of genetic and evolutionary computation conference. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 1271–1282

    Google Scholar 

  28. Salman AA, Mehrotra K, Mohan CK (2000) Adaptive linkage crossover. In: Whitley D (eds) Evolutionary computation, vol 8, no 3. MIT, Cambridge, pp 341–370

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sastry K, Xiao G (2001) Cluster optimization using extended compact genetic algorithm. Technical Report 2001016, Illinois Genetic algorithms Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL

  30. Smith J, Fogarty T (1996) Recombination strategy adaptation via evolution of gene linkage. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on evolutionary computation. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 826–831

  31. Thierens D (1999) Scalability problems of simple genetic algorithms. In: Whitley D (eds) Evolutionary computation, vol 7, no 4. MIT, Cambridge, pp 331–352

    Google Scholar 

  32. Watson RA, Pollack JB (1999). Hierarchically consistent test problems for genetic algorithms. In: Angeline PJ, Michalewicz Z, Schoenauer M, Yao X, Zalzala, A (eds) Proceedings of congress on evolutionary computation. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 1406–1413

    Google Scholar 

  33. Whitley D, Rana S, Dzubera J, Mathias KE (1996). Evaluating evolutionary algorithms. In Perrault CR, Sandewall E (eds) Artificial intelligence, vol 85, no 1–2. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 245–276

    Google Scholar 

  34. Winston PH (1992) Artificial intelligence, 3rd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand

    Chatchawit Aporntewan

  2. Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand

    Prabhas Chongstitvatana

Authors
  1. Chatchawit Aporntewan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prabhas Chongstitvatana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chatchawit Aporntewan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aporntewan, C., Chongstitvatana, P. Building-block Identification by Simultaneity Matrix. Soft Comput 11, 541–548 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-006-0097-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-006-0097-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation