Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strong, Stable, and Reliable Fitness Pressure in XCS due to Tournament Selection

  • Published:
Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent analysis of the XCS classifier system have shown that successful genetic learning strongly depends on the amount of fitness pressure towards accurate classifiers. Since the traditionally used proportionate selection is dependent on fitness scaling and fitness distribution, the resulting evolutionary fitness pressure may be neither stable nor sufficiently strong. Thus, we apply tournament selection to XCS. In particular, we exhibit the weakness of proportionate selection and suggest tournament selection as a more reliable alternative. We show that tournament selection results in a learning classifier system that is more parameter independent, noise independent, and more efficient in exploiting fitness guidance in single-step problems as well as multistep problems. The evolving population is more focused on promising subregions of the problem space and thus finds the desired accurate, maximally general representation faster and more reliably.

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. E. Bernadó, X. Llorà, and J. M. Garrell, “XCS and GALE: A comparative study of two learning classifier systems and six other learning algorithms on classification tasks”, in Advances in Learning Classifier Systems: Fourth International Workshop, IWLCS 2001. P. L. Lanzi, W. Stolzmann, and S. W. Wilson (Eds.), Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2002, pp. 115–132.

    Google Scholar 

  2. E. Bernadó-Mansilla and J. M. Garrell-Guiu, “Accuracy-based learning classifier systems: Models, analysis, and applications to classification tasks,” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 11, pp. 209–238, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. L. B. Booker, D. E. Goldberg, and J. H. Holland, “Classifier systems and genetic algorithms,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 40, pp. 235–282, 1989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. M. V. Butz and D. E. Goldberg, “Bounding the population size in XCS to ensure reproductive opportunities,” in Proceedings of the Fifth Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO-2003) 2003, pp. 1844–1856.

  5. M. V. Butz, D. E. Goldberg, and K. Tharakunnel, “Analysis and improvement of fitness exploitation in XCS: Bounding models, tournament selection, and bilateral accuracy,” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 11, pp. 239–277, 2003a.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. M. V. Butz, T. Kovacs, P. L. Lanzi, and S. W. Wilson, “How XCS evolves accurate classifiers,” in Proceedings of the Third Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO-2001), 2001, pp. 927–934.

  7. M. V. Butz and M. Pelikan, “Analyzing the evolutionary pressures in XCS,” Proceedings of the Third Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO-2001), 2001, pp. 935–942.

  8. M. V. Butz, K. Sastry, and D. E. Goldberg, “Tournament Selection in XCS,” in Proceedings of the Fifth Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO-2003), 2003b, pp. 1857–1869.

  9. M. V. Butz and S. W. Wilson, “An algorithmic description of XCS,” in Advances in Learning Classifier Systems: Third International Workshop, IWLCS 2000. P. L. Lanzi, W. Stolzmann, and S. W. Wilson (Eds.), Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2001, pp. 253–272.

    Google Scholar 

  10. K. A. De Jong and W. M. Spears, “Learning concept classification rules using genetic algorithms,” IJCAI-91 Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1991, pp. 651–656.

  11. P. W. Dixon, D. W. Corne, and M. J. Oates, “A preliminary investigation of modified XCS as a generic data mining tool,” in Advances in Learning Classifier Systems: Fourth International Workshop, IWLCS 2001, P. L. Lanzi, W. Stolzmann, and S. W. Wilson (Eds.), Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2002, pp. 133–150.

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. E. Goldberg, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning. Addison-Wesley-Reading, MA, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  13. D. E. Goldberg, The Design of Innovation: Lessons from and for Competent Genetic Algorithms. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston, MA, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. E. Goldberg and K. Deb, “A comparative analysis of selection schemes used in genetic algorithms,” Foundations of Genetic Algorithms, 1991, pp. 69–93.

  15. D. E. Goldberg and K. Sastry, “A practical schema theorem for genetic algorithm design and tuning,” in Proceedings of the Third Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO-2001), 2001, pp. 328–335.

  16. G. Harik, “Learning gene linkage to efficiently solve problems of bounded difficulty,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Michigan. also IlliGAL Report No. 97005, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1997.

  17. J. H. Holland, 1975, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, ML: 2nd edition 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. H. Holland, ‘Adaptation’, in Progress in Theoretical Biology, R. Rosen and F. Snell (Eds.), Vol. 4. Academic Press: New York, 1976, pp. 263–293.

    Google Scholar 

  19. L. P. Kaelbling, M. L. Littman, and A. W. Moore, “Reinforcement Learning: A Survey,” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 4, pp. 237–285, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  20. T. Kovacs, “XCS’s strength based twin: Part I,” in Fifth International Workshop on Learning Classifier Systems (IWLCS-2002), Workshop Working Notes. P. L. Lanzi, W. Stolzmann, and S. W. Wilson (Eds.), Granada, Spain, 2002, pp. 59–79.

    Google Scholar 

  21. T. Kovacs, Strength or Accuracy: Credit Assignment in Learning Classifier Systems. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  22. T. Kovacs and M. Kerber, “What makes a problem hard for XCS?,” in Advances in Learning Classifier Systems: Third International Workshop, IWLCS 2000. P. L. Lanzi, W. Stolzmann, and S. W. Wilson (Eds.), Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2001, pp. 80–99.

    Google Scholar 

  23. P. L. Lanzi, “An Analysis of Generalization in the XCS Classifier System,” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 125–149, 1999a.

    Google Scholar 

  24. P. L. Lanzi, ‘An extension to the XCS classifier system for stochastic environments’. Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO-99) 1999b, pp. 353–360.

  25. P. L. Lanzi, “Adaptive agents with reinforcement learning and internal memory,” From Animals to Animats 6: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, 2000, pp. 333–342.

  26. P. L. Lanzi, “Learning classifier systems from a reinforcement learning perspective,” Soft Computing: A Fusion of Foundations, Methodologies and Applications, vol. 6, pp. 162–170, 2002.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. P. L. Lanzi and S. W. Wilson, “Toward optimal classifier system performance in non-Markov environments,” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 393–418, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. M. Pelikan, D. E. Goldberg, and F. Lobo, “A survey of optimization by building and using probabilistic models,” Computational Optimization and Applications, vol. 21 no. 1, pp. 5–20, 2002.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. R. S. Sutton and A. G. Barto, Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  30. D. Thierens and D. E. Goldberg, “Mixing in genetic algorithms,” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, 1993, pp. 38–45.

  31. G. Venturini, “Adaptation in dynamic environments through a minimal probability of exploration,” in From Animals to Animats 3: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, 1994, pp. 371–381.

  32. C. J. Watkins, C. H., “Learning from Delayed Rewards,” Ph.D. thesis, King’s College, Cambridge, UK, 1989.

  33. S. W. Wilson, “Classifier fitness based on accuracy,” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 149–175, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  34. S. W. Wilson, “Generalization in the XCS classifier system,” Genetic Programming 1998: Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference, 1998, pp. 665–674.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Illinois Genetic Algorithms Laboratory (IlliGAL), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 104 S. Mathews, 61801, Urbana, IL, USA

    Martin V. Butz, Kumara Sastry & David E. Goldberg

Authors
  1. Martin V. Butz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kumara Sastry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David E. Goldberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin V. Butz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Butz, M.V., Sastry, K. & Goldberg, D.E. Strong, Stable, and Reliable Fitness Pressure in XCS due to Tournament Selection. Genet Program Evolvable Mach 6, 53–77 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10710-005-7619-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10710-005-7619-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation