Facilitating Function Application in Code Building Genetic Programming
Pages 887 - 895
Abstract
Code Building Genetic Programming (CBGP) is a method for general inductive program synthesis that uses a genetic algorithm and a formal type system to evolve linear genomes that are compiled into type-safe programs in a host language. Prior work showed that CBGP can evolve programs that use arbitrary abstractions from existing codebases along with higher-order functions and polymorphism. In tests on benchmark problems, however, the problem solving capabilities of CBGP have been mixed. One hypothesized explanation for weak performance on some problems is that many functions encountered during the compilation process are typically not applied. Here we propose two modifications to the compilation algorithm, both of which make it more likely that functions will be applied when composing programs. The first modification changes how frequently CBGP attempts to perform function application, while the second allows the construction of function applications to backtrack. While both modifications increase solution rates on benchmark problems, the backtracking modification shows more promise with a modest increase in computational cost and no additional configuration requirements. We argue that this modification should be considered the new standard compilation algorithm for CBGP systems.
References
[1]
Jacob Austin, Augustus Odena, Maxwell Nye, Maarten Bosma, Henryk Michalewski, David Dohan, Ellen Jiang, Carrie Cai, Michael Terry, Quoc Le, and Charles Sutton. 2021. Program Synthesis with Large Language Models. arXiv:2108.07732 [cs.PL]
[2]
Sally C Brailsford, Chris N Potts, and Barbara M Smith. 1999. Constraint satisfaction problems: Algorithms and applications. European journal of operational research 119, 3 (1999), 557--581.
[3]
Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Henrique Ponde de Oliveira Pinto, Jared Kaplan, Harri Edwards, Yuri Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, Alex Ray, Raul Puri, Gretchen Krueger, Michael Petrov, Heidy Khlaaf, Girish Sastry, Pamela Mishkin, Brooke Chan, Scott Gray, Nick Ryder, Mikhail Pavlov, Alethea Power, Lukasz Kaiser, Mohammad Bavarian, Clemens Winter, Philippe Tillet, Felipe Petroski Such, Dave Cummings, Matthias Plappert, Fotios Chantzis, Elizabeth Barnes, Ariel Herbert-Voss, William Hebgen Guss, Alex Nichol, Alex Paino, Nikolas Tezak, Jie Tang, Igor Babuschkin, Suchir Balaji, Shantanu Jain, William Saunders, Christopher Hesse, Andrew N. Carr, Jan Leike, Josh Achiam, Vedant Misra, Evan Morikawa, Alec Radford, Matthew Knight, Miles Brundage, Mira Murati, Katie Mayer, Peter Welinder, Bob McGrew, Dario Amodei, Sam McCandlish, Ilya Sutskever, and Wojciech Zaremba. 2021. Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code. arXiv:2107.03374 [cs.LG]
[4]
William F Clocksin and Christopher S Mellish. 2003. Programming in PROLOG. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin.
[5]
Li Ding, Edward Pantridge, and Lee Spector. 2023. Probabilistic Lexicase Selection. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Lisbon, Portugal) (GECCO '23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1073--1081.
[6]
Zhiyu Fan, Xiang Gao, Martin Mirchev, Abhik Roychoudhury, and Shin Hwei Tan. 2023. Automated Repair of Programs from Large Language Models. In 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 1469--1481.
[7]
Austin J. Ferguson, Jose Guadalupe Hernandez, Daniel Junghans, Alexander Lalejini, Emily Dolson, and Charles Ofria. 2019. Characterizing the effects of random subsampling and dilution on Lexicase selection. In Genetic Programming Theory and Practice XVII, Wolfgang Banzhaf, Erik Goodman, Leigh Sheneman, Leonardo Trujillo, and Bill Worzel (Eds.). Springer, East Lansing, MI, USA, 1--23.
[8]
Matheus Campos Fernandes, Fabrício Olivetti de França, and Emilio Francesquini. 2023. HOTGP-Higher-Order Typed Genetic Programming. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.03200 (2023).
[9]
Stefan Forstenlechner, David Fagan, Miguel Nicolau, and Michael O'Neill. 2018. Towards effective semantic operators for program synthesis in genetic programming. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Kyoto, Japan) (GECCO '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1119--1126.
[10]
Fraser Garrow, Michael A. Lones, and Robert Stewart. 2022. Why functional program synthesis matters (in the realm of genetic programming). In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion (Boston, Massachusetts) (GECCO '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1844--1853.
[11]
Thomas Helmuth, Nicholas Freitag McPhee, and Lee Spector. 2018. Program Synthesis Using Uniform Mutation by Addition and Deletion. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Kyoto, Japan) (GECCO '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1127--1134.
[12]
Thomas Helmuth, Edward Pantridge, Grace Woolson, and Lee Spector. 2020. Genetic Source Sensitivity and Transfer Learning in Genetic Programming. In Artificial Life Conference Proceedings. MIT Press, 303--311.
[13]
Thomas Helmuth and Lee Spector. 2015. General Program Synthesis Benchmark Suite. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Madrid, Spain) (GECCO '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1039--1046.
[14]
Thomas Helmuth, Lee Spector, and James Matheson. 2015. Solving Uncompromising Problems with Lexicase Selection. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 19, 5 (Oct. 2015), 630--643.
[15]
John R. Koza. 1992. Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural Selection. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
[16]
Vipin Kumar. 1992. Algorithms for constraint-satisfaction problems: A survey. AI magazine 13, 1 (1992), 32--32.
[17]
Joel Lehman, Jonathan Gordon, Shawn Jain, Kamal Ndousse, Cathy Yeh, and Kenneth O. Stanley. 2024. Evolution Through Large Models. Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 331--366.
[18]
Vadim Liventsev, Anastasiia Grishina, Aki Härmä, and Leon Moonen. 2023. Fully Autonomous Programming with Large Language Models. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Lisbon, Portugal) (GECCO '23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1146--1155.
[19]
David J. Montana. 1995. Strongly Typed Genetic Programming. Evolutionary Computation 3, 2 (06 1995), 199--230. arXiv:https://direct.mit.edu/evco/article-pdf/3/2/199/1492842/evco.1995.3.2.199.pdf
[20]
Edward Pantridge and Thomas Helmuth. 2023. Solving Novel Program Synthesis Problems with Genetic Programming using Parametric Polymorphism. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Lisbon, Portugal) (GECCO '23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1175--1183.
[21]
Edward Pantridge, Thomas Helmuth, and Lee Spector. 2022. Functional Code Building Genetic Programming. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Boston, Massachusetts) (GECCO '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1000--1008.
[22]
Edward Pantridge and Lee Spector. 2020. Code Building Genetic Programming. In Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Cancún, Mexico) (GECCO '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 994--1002.
[23]
Kia Rahmani, Mohammad Raza, Sumit Gulwani, Vu Le, Daniel Morris, Arjun Radhakrishna, Gustavo Soares, and Ashish Tiwari. 2021. Multi-modal program inference: a marriage of pre-trained language models and component-based synthesis. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages 5, OOPSLA (2021), 1--29.
[24]
Dominik Sobania, Martin Briesch, and Franz Rothlauf. 2022. Choose Your Programming Copilot: A Comparison of the Program Synthesis Performance of Github Copilot and Genetic Programming. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Boston, Massachusetts) (GECCO '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1019--1027.
[25]
Dominik Sobania, Dirk Schweim, and Franz Rothlauf. 2023. A Comprehensive Survey on Program Synthesis With Evolutionary Algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 27, 1 (2023), 82--97.
Index Terms
- Facilitating Function Application in Code Building Genetic Programming
Recommendations
Functional code building genetic programming
GECCO '22: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation ConferenceGeneral program synthesis has become an important application area for genetic programming (GP), and for artificial intelligence more generally. Code Building Genetic Programming (CBGP) is a recently introduced GP method for general program synthesis ...
Solving Novel Program Synthesis Problems with Genetic Programming using Parametric Polymorphism
GECCO '23: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation ConferenceContemporary genetic programming (GP) systems for general program synthesis have been primarily concerned with evolving programs that can manipulate values from a standard set of primitive data types and simple indexed data structures. In contrast, ...
Code building genetic programming
GECCO '20: Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation ConferenceIn recent years the field of genetic programming has made significant advances towards automatic programming. Research and development of contemporary program synthesis methods, such as PushGP and Grammar Guided Genetic Programming, can produce programs ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
July 2024
1657 pages
Copyright © 2024 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 14 July 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Funding Sources
Conference
GECCO '24
Sponsor:
GECCO '24: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
July 14 - 18, 2024
VIC, Melbourne, Australia
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,669 of 4,410 submissions, 38%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 142Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)142
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)21
Reflects downloads up to 07 Mar 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in