An Examination on the Modularity of Grammars in Grammatical Evolutionary Design
Inhaltsverzeichnis
Reference
Swafford J.M., Michael O'Neill; (2010) An Examination on the Modularity of Grammars in Grammatical Evolutionary Design. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, Proceedings of the Congress on Evolutionary Computation
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2010.5586483
Abstract
This work furthers the understanding of mod- ularity in grammar-based genetic programming approaches by analyzing how different grammars may be capable of producing the same phenotypes, but still display differences in performance on the same problems. This is done by creating four grammars with varying levels of modularity and using them with grammatical evolution to evolve floor plan designs. The results of this experimentation show how increases in modularity, brought about by simple modifications in the grammars, and increases in the quality of solutions go hand in hand. It also demonstrates how more modular grammars explore more individuals even while fitness remains the same or changes in only minor increments.
Extended Abstract
Bibtex
Used References
[1] P. J. Angeline and J. Pollack. Evolutionary module acquisition. In D. Fogel and W. Atmar, editors, Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference on Evolutionary Programming, pages 154–163, La Jolla, CA, USA, 25-26 Feb. 1993.
[2] E. D. de Jong, D. Thierens, and R. A. Watson. Defining modularity,
hierarchy, and repetition. In R. Poli, S. Cagnoni, and et al., editors,
GECCO 2004 Workshop Proceedings, Seattle, Washington, USA, June
2004.
[3] I. Dempsey, M. O’Neill, and A. Brabazon. Foundations in Grammat- ical Evolution for Dynamic Environments. Springer, 2009.
[4] O. O. Garibay. Analyzing the Effects of Modularity on Search Spaces. PhD thesis, University of Central Florida, 2008.
[5] J. K. Gershenson, G. J. Prasad, and S. Allamneni. Modular product design : A life-cycle view. J. Integr. Des. Process Sci., 3(4):13–26, 1999.
[6] J. H. Holland. Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1975.
[7] G. S. Hornby. Measuring, enabling and comparing modularity, regular- ity and hierarchy in evolutionary design. In H.-G. Beyer and U.-M. O. et al., editors, GECCO 2005: Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, volume 2, pages 1729–1736, Washington DC, USA, 25-29 June 2005. ACM Press.
[8] J. R. Koza. Genetic Programming: on the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural Selection. MIT Press, 1992.
[9] J. R. Koza. Genetic Programming II: Automatic Discovery of Reusable Programs. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1994.
[10] K. Krawiec and B. Wieloch. Functional modularity for genetic programming. In GECCO ’09: Proceedings of the 11th Annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pages 995–1002, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM.
[11] H. Lipson, J. B. Pollack, and N. P. Suh. Promoting modularity in evolutionary design. In Proceedings of DETC’01: 2001 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, 2001.
[12] M. O’Neill, E. Hemberg, C. Gilligan, E. Bartley, J. McDermott, and A. Brabazon. GEVA: grammatical evolution in Java. ACM SIGEVOlution, 3(2):17–22, 2008.
[13] M. O’Neill and C. Ryan. Grammatical Evolution: Evolutionary Automatic Programming in an Arbitrary Language. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003.
[14] U.-M. O’Reilly. Investigating the generality of automatically defined functions. In GECCO ’96: Proceedings of the First Annual Conference on Genetic Programming, pages 351–356, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1996. MIT Press.
[15] R. Poli, N. McPhee, and W. Langdon. A Field Guide to Genetic Pro- gramming. Published via http://lulu.com and freely available at http://www.gp-field-guide.org.uk, 2008.
[16] J. Woodward. Modularity in genetic programming. In In Genetic Programming, Proceedings of EuroGP 2003, pages 14–16. Springer- Verlag, 2003.
Links
Full Text
http://researchrepository.ucd.ie/bitstream/handle/10197/2544/anexamination.pdf?sequence=1
