Evolution design of buildable objects with blind builder: an empirical study
Inhaltsverzeichnis
Reference
Alexandre Devert and Nicolas Bredeche and Marc Schoenauer: Evolution design of buildable objects with blind builder: an empirical study. Proceedings of the Third Asian-Pacific workshop on Genetic Programming, pp. 98-109, 2006.
DOI
Abstract
In a previous paper, we presented BlindBuilder, a new repre- sentation formalism for Evolutionary Design based on construction plans. As for other indirect encoding approaches in the literature, BlindBuilder makes it possible to easily represent possible solutions but makes it dif- ficult to perform structural optimization. While satisfying results are provided, it becomes more and more difficult to build larger structures during the course of evolution. This is due to the high disruptive rate of variation operators as construction plans grow. In this paper, we provide an analysis of such a problem and propose new construction operators to avoid this. Then, we perform extensive experiments so as to identify the key parameters and discuss the advantages, limitations and possible perspectives of the indirect enconding approach.
Extended Abstract
Bibtex
Used References
1. Peter J. Bentley. Evolutionary Design by Computers. 1999.
2. J. Bongard and R. Pfeifer. Evolving complete agents using artificial ontogeny, 2003.
3. Alexandre Devert et al. Blindbuilder: A new encoding to evolve lego-like structures. In EuroGP, pages 61–72, 2006.
4. Forrest H Bennett III et al. Building a parallel computer system for $18,000 that performs a half peta-flop per day. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, volume 2, pages 1484–1490, 1999.
5. Jason Lohn et al. Evolutionary antenna design for a NASA spacecraft. In Genetic Programming Theory and Practice II, chapter 18, pages 301–315. 2004.
6. John R. Koza et al. Genetic Programming 3: Darwinian Invention and Problem Solving. 1999.
7. Maxim Peysakhov et al. Using assembly representations to enable evolutionary design of lego structures. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf., 17(2):155–168, 2003.
8. Peter Bentley et al. Three ways to grow designs: A comparison of embryogenies for an evolutionary design problem. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, volume 1, pages 35–43, 1999.
9. Pablo J. Funes and Jordan B. Pollack. Computer evolution of buildable objects for evolutionary design by computers, 1998.
10. F. Gruau. Neural Network Synthesis using Cellular Encoding and the Genetic Algorithm. PhD thesis, Ecole Normale Suprieure de Lyon, France, 1994.
11. Gregory S. Hornby. Measuring, enabling and comparing modularity, regularity and hierarchy in evolutionary design. In GECCO 2005, volume 2, pages 1729– 1736, 2005.
12. Hod Lipson and Jordan B. Pollack. Automatic design and manufacture of robotic lifeforms. Nature, 406:974–978, 2000.
13. John Rieffel. Evolutionary Fabrication: The Co-Evolution of Form and Formation .. PhD thesis, Brandeis University, USA, 2006.
14. Karl Sims. Evolving 3d morphology and behavior by competition. Artificial Life, 1(4), 1994.
Links
Full Text
http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~wbl/biblio/aspgp06/devert-bredeche-schoenauer-ASPGP2006.pdf
