Oliver Kramer Machine Learning for Evolution Strategies Studies in Big Data

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Oliver Kramer Machine Learning for Evolution Strategies Studies in Big Data Studies in Big Data 20 Oliver Kramer Machine Learning for Evolution Strategies Studies in Big Data Volume 20 Series editor Janusz Kacprzyk, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland e-mail: [email protected] About this Series The series “Studies in Big Data” (SBD) publishes new developments and advances in the various areas of Big Data- quickly and with a high quality. The intent is to cover the theory, research, development, and applications of Big Data, as embedded in the fields of engineering, computer science, physics, economics and life sciences. The books of the series refer to the analysis and understanding of large, complex, and/or distributed data sets generated from recent digital sources coming from sensors or other physical instruments as well as simulations, crowd sourcing, social networks or other internet transactions, such as emails or video click streams and other. The series contains monographs, lecture notes and edited volumes in Big Data spanning the areas of computational intelligence incl. neural networks, evolutionary computation, soft computing, fuzzy systems, as well as artificial intelligence, data mining, modern statistics and Operations research, as well as self-organizing systems. Of particular value to both the contributors and the readership are the short publication timeframe and the world-wide distribution, which enable both wide and rapid dissemination of research output. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/11970 Oliver Kramer Machine Learning for Evolution Strategies 123 Oliver Kramer Informatik Universität Oldenburg Oldenburg Germany ISSN 2197-6503 ISSN 2197-6511 (electronic) Studies in Big Data ISBN 978-3-319-33381-6 ISBN 978-3-319-33383-0 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-33383-0 Library of Congress Control Number: 2016938389 © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. Printed on acid-free paper This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland Contents 1 Introduction ........................................ 1 1.1 Computational Intelligence . 1 1.2 Optimization . 1 1.3 Machine Learning and Big Data . 3 1.4 Motivation . 5 1.5 Benchmark Problems . 5 1.6 Overview . 6 1.7 Previous Work. 8 1.8 Notations . 8 1.9 Python . 9 References . 10 Part I Evolution Strategies 2 Evolution Strategies ................................... 13 2.1 Introduction. 13 2.2 Evolutionary Algorithms . 14 2.3 History . 15 2.4 Recombination. 16 2.5 Mutation. 16 2.6 Selection. 17 2.7 Rechenberg’s 1/5th Success Rule . 18 2.8 (1+1)-ES. 19 2.9 Conclusions . 20 References . 21 3 Covariance Matrix Estimation ........................... 23 3.1 Introduction. 23 3.2 Covariance Matrix Estimation . 24 3.3 Algorithm . 25 3.4 Related Work . 26 v vi Contents 3.5 Experimental Analysis . 27 3.6 Conclusions . 30 References . 31 Part II Machine Learning 4 Machine Learning .................................... 35 4.1 Introduction. 35 4.2 Prediction and Inference . 36 4.3 Classification. 37 4.4 Model Selection. 38 4.5 Curse of Dimensionality . 39 4.6 Bias-Variance Trade-Off . 40 4.7 Feature Selection and Extraction . 41 4.8 Conclusions . 42 References . 43 5 Scikit-Learn......................................... 45 5.1 Introduction. 45 5.2 Data Management . 46 5.3 Supervised Learning. 47 5.4 Pre-processing Methods . 48 5.5 Model Evaluation. 49 5.6 Model Selection. 50 5.7 Unsupervised Learning . 51 5.8 Conclusions . 52 Reference . 53 Part III Supervised Learning 6 Fitness Meta-Modeling ................................. 57 6.1 Introduction. 57 6.2 Nearest Neighbors . 58 6.3 Algorithm . 59 6.4 Related Work . 60 6.5 Experimental Analysis . 61 6.6 Conclusions . 64 References . 64 7 Constraint Meta-Modeling .............................. 67 7.1 Introduction. 67 7.2 Support Vector Machines . 68 7.3 Algorithm . 71 7.4 Related Work . 72 Contents vii 7.5 Experimental Analysis . 73 7.6 Conclusions . 75 References . 75 Part IV Unsupervised Learning 8 Dimensionality Reduction Optimization..................... 79 8.1 Introduction. 79 8.2 Dimensionality Reduction . 80 8.3 Principal Component Analysis . 80 8.4 Algorithm . 82 8.5 Related Work . 83 8.6 Experimental Analysis . 84 8.7 Conclusions . 86 References . 87 9 Solution Space Visualization............................. 89 9.1 Introduction. 89 9.2 Isometric Mapping . 90 9.3 Algorithm . 92 9.4 Related Work . 93 9.5 Experimental Analysis . 94 9.6 Conclusions . 96 References . 97 10 Clustering-Based Niching ............................... 99 10.1 Introduction. 99 10.2 Clustering . 100 10.3 Algorithm . 101 10.4 Related Work . 102 10.5 Experimental Analysis . 103 10.6 Conclusions . 106 References . 106 Part V Ending 11 Summary and Outlook................................. 111 11.1 Summary . ..
Recommended publications
  • AI, Robots, and Swarms: Issues, Questions, and Recommended Studies
    AI, Robots, and Swarms Issues, Questions, and Recommended Studies Andrew Ilachinski January 2017 Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited. This document contains the best opinion of CNA at the time of issue. It does not necessarily represent the opinion of the sponsor. Distribution Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited. Specific authority: N00014-11-D-0323. Copies of this document can be obtained through the Defense Technical Information Center at www.dtic.mil or contact CNA Document Control and Distribution Section at 703-824-2123. Photography Credits: http://www.darpa.mil/DDM_Gallery/Small_Gremlins_Web.jpg; http://4810-presscdn-0-38.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/ Robotics.jpg; http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-edia/image/upload/18kxb5jw3e01ujpg.jpg Approved by: January 2017 Dr. David A. Broyles Special Activities and Innovation Operations Evaluation Group Copyright © 2017 CNA Abstract The military is on the cusp of a major technological revolution, in which warfare is conducted by unmanned and increasingly autonomous weapon systems. However, unlike the last “sea change,” during the Cold War, when advanced technologies were developed primarily by the Department of Defense (DoD), the key technology enablers today are being developed mostly in the commercial world. This study looks at the state-of-the-art of AI, machine-learning, and robot technologies, and their potential future military implications for autonomous (and semi-autonomous) weapon systems. While no one can predict how AI will evolve or predict its impact on the development of military autonomous systems, it is possible to anticipate many of the conceptual, technical, and operational challenges that DoD will face as it increasingly turns to AI-based technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • Symbolic Computation Using Grammatical Evolution
    Symbolic Computation using Grammatical Evolution Alan Christianson Department of Mathematics and Computer Science South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Rapid City, SD 57701 [email protected] Jeff McGough Department of Mathematics and Computer Science South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Rapid City, SD 57701 [email protected] March 20, 2009 Abstract Evolutionary Algorithms have demonstrated results in a vast array of optimization prob- lems and are regularly employed in engineering design. However, many mathematical problems have shown traditional methods to be the more effective approach. In the case of symbolic computation, it may be difficult or not feasible to extend numerical approachs and thus leave the door open to other methods. In this paper, we study the application of a grammar-based approach in Evolutionary Com- puting known as Grammatical Evolution (GE) to a selected problem in control theory. Grammatical evolution is a variation of genetic programming. GE does not operate di- rectly on the expression but following a lead from nature indirectly through genome strings. These evolved strings are used to select production rules in a BNF grammar to generate algebraic expressions which are potential solutions to the problem at hand. Traditional approaches have been plagued by unrestrained expression growth, stagnation and lack of convergence. These are addressed by the more biologically realistic BNF representation and variations in the genetic operators. 1 Introduction Control Theory is a well established field which concerns itself with the modeling and reg- ulation of dynamical processes. The discipline brings robust mathematical tools to address many questions in process control.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Algorithm: Reviews, Implementations, and Applications
    Paper— Genetic Algorithm: Reviews, Implementation and Applications Genetic Algorithm: Reviews, Implementations, and Applications Tanweer Alam() Faculty of Computer and Information Systems, Islamic University of Madinah, Saudi Arabia [email protected] Shamimul Qamar Computer Engineering Department, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia Amit Dixit Department of ECE, Quantum School of Technology, Roorkee, India Mohamed Benaida Faculty of Computer and Information Systems, Islamic University of Madinah, Saudi Arabia How to cite this article? Tanweer Alam. Shamimul Qamar. Amit Dixit. Mohamed Benaida. " Genetic Al- gorithm: Reviews, Implementations, and Applications.", International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP). 2020. Abstract—Nowadays genetic algorithm (GA) is greatly used in engineering ped- agogy as an adaptive technique to learn and solve complex problems and issues. It is a meta-heuristic approach that is used to solve hybrid computation chal- lenges. GA utilizes selection, crossover, and mutation operators to effectively manage the searching system strategy. This algorithm is derived from natural se- lection and genetics concepts. GA is an intelligent use of random search sup- ported with historical data to contribute the search in an area of the improved outcome within a coverage framework. Such algorithms are widely used for maintaining high-quality reactions to optimize issues and problems investigation. These techniques are recognized to be somewhat of a statistical investigation pro- cess to search for a suitable solution or prevent an accurate strategy for challenges in optimization or searches. These techniques have been produced from natu- ral selection or genetics principles. For random testing, historical information is provided with intelligent enslavement to continue moving the search out from the area of improved features for processing of the outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • A Covariance Matrix Self-Adaptation Evolution Strategy for Optimization Under Linear Constraints Patrick Spettel, Hans-Georg Beyer, and Michael Hellwig
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION, VOL. XX, NO. X, MONTH XXXX 1 A Covariance Matrix Self-Adaptation Evolution Strategy for Optimization under Linear Constraints Patrick Spettel, Hans-Georg Beyer, and Michael Hellwig Abstract—This paper addresses the development of a co- functions cannot be expressed in terms of (exact) mathematical variance matrix self-adaptation evolution strategy (CMSA-ES) expressions. Moreover, if that information is incomplete or if for solving optimization problems with linear constraints. The that information is hidden in a black-box, EAs are a good proposed algorithm is referred to as Linear Constraint CMSA- ES (lcCMSA-ES). It uses a specially built mutation operator choice as well. Such methods are commonly referred to as together with repair by projection to satisfy the constraints. The direct search, derivative-free, or zeroth-order methods [15], lcCMSA-ES evolves itself on a linear manifold defined by the [16], [17], [18]. In fact, the unconstrained case has been constraints. The objective function is only evaluated at feasible studied well. In addition, there is a wealth of proposals in the search points (interior point method). This is a property often field of Evolutionary Computation dealing with constraints in required in application domains such as simulation optimization and finite element methods. The algorithm is tested on a variety real-parameter optimization, see e.g. [19]. This field is mainly of different test problems revealing considerable results. dominated by Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithms and Differential Evolution (DE) [20], [21], [22]. For the case Index Terms—Constrained Optimization, Covariance Matrix Self-Adaptation Evolution Strategy, Black-Box Optimization of constrained discrete optimization, it has been shown that Benchmarking, Interior Point Optimization Method turning constrained optimization problems into multi-objective optimization problems can achieve better performance than I.
    [Show full text]
  • Accelerating Real-Valued Genetic Algorithms Using Mutation-With-Momentum
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of Tasmania Open Access Repository Accelerating Real-Valued Genetic Algorithms Using Mutation-With-Momentum Luke Temby, Peter Vamplew and Adam Berry Technical Report 2005-02 School of Computing, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 100, Hobart This report is an extended version of a paper of the same title presented at AI'05: The 18th Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Sydney, Australia, 5-9 Dec 2005. Abstract: In a canonical genetic algorithm, the reproduction operators (crossover and mutation) are random in nature. The direction of the search carried out by the GA system is driven purely by the bias to fitter individuals in the selection process. Several authors have proposed the use of directed mutation operators as a means of improving the convergence speed of GAs on problems involving real-valued alleles. This paper proposes a new approach to directed mutation based on the momentum concept commonly used to accelerate the gradient descent training of neural networks. This mutation-with- momentum operator is compared against standard Gaussian mutation across a series of benchmark problems, and is shown to regularly result in rapid improvements in performance during the early generations of the GA. A hybrid system combining the momentum-based and standard mutation operators is shown to outperform either individual approach to mutation across all of the benchmarks. 1 Introduction In a traditional genetic algorithm (GA) using a bit-string representation, the mutation operator acts primarily to preserve diversity within the population, ensuring that alleles can not be permanently lost from the population.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Evolution Strategies
    Natural Evolution Strategies Daan Wierstra, Tom Schaul, Jan Peters and Juergen Schmidhuber Abstract— This paper presents Natural Evolution Strategies be crucial to find the right domain-specific trade-off on issues (NES), a novel algorithm for performing real-valued ‘black such as convergence speed, expected quality of the solutions box’ function optimization: optimizing an unknown objective found and the algorithm’s sensitivity to local suboptima on function where algorithm-selected function measurements con- stitute the only information accessible to the method. Natu- the fitness landscape. ral Evolution Strategies search the fitness landscape using a A variety of algorithms has been developed within this multivariate normal distribution with a self-adapting mutation framework, including methods such as Simulated Anneal- matrix to generate correlated mutations in promising regions. ing [5], Simultaneous Perturbation Stochastic Optimiza- NES shares this property with Covariance Matrix Adaption tion [6], simple Hill Climbing, Particle Swarm Optimiza- (CMA), an Evolution Strategy (ES) which has been shown to perform well on a variety of high-precision optimization tion [7] and the class of Evolutionary Algorithms, of which tasks. The Natural Evolution Strategies algorithm, however, is Evolution Strategies (ES) [8], [9], [10] and in particular its simpler, less ad-hoc and more principled. Self-adaptation of the Covariance Matrix Adaption (CMA) instantiation [11] are of mutation matrix is derived using a Monte Carlo estimate of the great interest to us. natural gradient towards better expected fitness. By following Evolution Strategies, so named because of their inspira- the natural gradient instead of the ‘vanilla’ gradient, we can ensure efficient update steps while preventing early convergence tion from natural Darwinian evolution, generally produce due to overly greedy updates, resulting in reduced sensitivity consecutive generations of samples.
    [Show full text]
  • Solving a Highly Multimodal Design Optimization Problem Using the Extended Genetic Algorithm GLEAM
    Solving a highly multimodal design optimization problem using the extended genetic algorithm GLEAM W. Jakob, M. Gorges-Schleuter, I. Sieber, W. Süß, H. Eggert Institute for Applied Computer Science, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, P.O. 3640, D-76021 Karlsruhe, Germany, EMail: [email protected] Abstract In the area of micro system design the usage of simulation and optimization must precede the production of specimen or test batches due to the expensive and time consuming nature of the production process itself. In this paper we report on the design optimization of a heterodyne receiver which is a detection module for opti- cal communication-systems. The collimating lens-system of the receiver is opti- mized with respect to the tolerances of the fabrication and assembly process as well as to the spherical aberrations of the lenses. It is shown that this is a highly multimodal problem which cannot be solved by traditional local hill climbing algorithms. For the applicability of more sophisticated search methods like our extended Genetic Algorithm GLEAM short runtimes for the simulation or a small amount of simulation runs is essential. Thus we tested a new approach, the so called optimization foreruns, the results of which are used for the initialization of the main optimization run. The promising results were checked by testing the approach with mathematical test functions known from literature. The surprising result was that most of these functions behave considerable different from our real world problems, which limits their usefulness drastically. 1 Introduction The production of specimen for microcomponents or microsystems is both, mate- rial and time consuming because of the sophisticated manufacturing techniques.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1606.00601V1 [Cs.NE] 2 Jun 2016 Keywords: Pr Solving Tasks
    On the performance of different mutation operators of a subpopulation-based genetic algorithm for multi-robot task allocation problems Chun Liua,b,∗, Andreas Krollb aSchool of Automation, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications No 10, Xitucheng Road, 100876, Beijing, China bDepartment of Measurement and Control, Mechanical Engineering, University of Kassel M¨onchebergstraße 7, 34125, Kassel, Germany Abstract The performance of different mutation operators is usually evaluated in conjunc- tion with specific parameter settings of genetic algorithms and target problems. Most studies focus on the classical genetic algorithm with different parameters or on solving unconstrained combinatorial optimization problems such as the traveling salesman problems. In this paper, a subpopulation-based genetic al- gorithm that uses only mutation and selection is developed to solve multi-robot task allocation problems. The target problems are constrained combinatorial optimization problems, and are more complex if cooperative tasks are involved as these introduce additional spatial and temporal constraints. The proposed genetic algorithm can obtain better solutions than classical genetic algorithms with tournament selection and partially mapped crossover. The performance of different mutation operators in solving problems without/with cooperative arXiv:1606.00601v1 [cs.NE] 2 Jun 2016 tasks is evaluated. The results imply that inversion mutation performs better than others when solving problems without cooperative tasks, and the swap- inversion combination performs better than others when solving problems with cooperative tasks. Keywords: constrained combinatorial optimization, genetic algorithm, ∗Corresponding author. Email addresses: [email protected] (Chun Liu), [email protected] (Andreas Kroll) August 13, 2018 mutation operators, subpopulation, multi-robot task allocation, inspection problems 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing the Performance of Mutation Operators to Solve the Travelling Salesman Problem
    Analyzing the Performance of Mutation Operators to Solve the Travelling Salesman Problem Otman ABDOUN, Jaafar ABOUCHABAKA, Chakir TAJANI LaRIT Laboratory, Faculty of sciences, Ibn Tofail University, Kenitra, Morocco [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract. The genetic algorithm includes some parameters that should be adjusted, so as to get reliable results. Choosing a representation of the problem addressed, an initial population, a method of selection, a crossover operator, mutation operator, the probabilities of crossover and mutation, and the insertion method creates a variant of genetic algorithms. Our work is part of the answer to this perspective to find a solution for this combinatorial problem. What are the best parameters to select for a genetic algorithm that creates a variety efficient to solve the Travelling Salesman Problem (TSP)? In this paper, we present a comparative analysis of different mutation operators, surrounded by a dilated discussion that justifying the relevance of genetic operators chosen to solving the TSP problem. Keywords: Genetic Algorithm, TSP, Mutation Operator, Probability of mutation. 1 INTRODUCTION Nature uses several mechanisms which have led to the emergence of new species and still better adapted to their environments. The laws which react to species evolution have been known by the research of Charles Darwin in the last century[1]. We know that Darwin was the founder of the theory of evolution however John Henry Holland team's had the initiative in developing the canonical genetic algorithm, (CGA) to solve an optimization problem. Thereafter, the Goldberg work [2] is more used in a lot of applications domain.
    [Show full text]
  • A Restart CMA Evolution Strategy with Increasing Population Size
    1769 A Restart CMA Evolution Strategy With Increasing Population Size Anne Auger Nikolaus Hansen CoLab Computational Laboratory, CSE Lab, ETH Zurich, Switzerland ETH Zurich, Switzerland [email protected] [email protected] Abstract- In this paper we introduce a restart-CMA- 2 The restart CMA-ES evolution strategy, where the population size is increased for each restart (IPOP). By increasing the population The (,uw, )-CMA-ES In this paper we use the (,uw, )- size the search characteristic becomes more global af- CMA-ES thoroughly described in [3]. We sum up the gen- ter each restart. The IPOP-CMA-ES is evaluated on the eral principle of the algorithm in the following and refer to test suit of 25 functions designed for the special session [3] for the details. on real-parameter optimization of CEC 2005. Its perfor- For generation g + 1, offspring are sampled indepen- mance is compared to a local restart strategy with con- dently according to a multi-variate normal distribution stant small population size. On unimodal functions the ) fork=1,... performance is similar. On multi-modal functions the -(9+1) A-()(K ( (9))2C(g)) local restart strategy significantly outperforms IPOP in where denotes a normally distributed random 4 test cases whereas IPOP performs significantly better N(mr, C) in 29 out of 60 tested cases. vector with mean m' and covariance matrix C. The , best offspring are recombined into the new mean value (Y)(0+1) = Z wix(-+w), where the positive weights 1 Introduction w E JR sum to one. The equations for updating the re- The Covariance Matrix Adaptation Evolution Strategy maining parameters of the normal distribution are given in (CMA-ES) [5, 7, 4] is an evolution strategy that adapts [3]: Eqs.
    [Show full text]
  • Neuroevolution Strategies for Episodic Reinforcement Learning ∗ Verena Heidrich-Meisner , Christian Igel
    J. Algorithms 64 (2009) 152–168 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Algorithms Cognition, Informatics and Logic www.elsevier.com/locate/jalgor Neuroevolution strategies for episodic reinforcement learning ∗ Verena Heidrich-Meisner , Christian Igel Institut für Neuroinformatik, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 44780 Bochum, Germany article info abstract Article history: Because of their convincing performance, there is a growing interest in using evolutionary Received 30 April 2009 algorithms for reinforcement learning. We propose learning of neural network policies Available online 8 May 2009 by the covariance matrix adaptation evolution strategy (CMA-ES), a randomized variable- metric search algorithm for continuous optimization. We argue that this approach, Keywords: which we refer to as CMA Neuroevolution Strategy (CMA-NeuroES), is ideally suited for Reinforcement learning Evolution strategy reinforcement learning, in particular because it is based on ranking policies (and therefore Covariance matrix adaptation robust against noise), efficiently detects correlations between parameters, and infers a Partially observable Markov decision process search direction from scalar reinforcement signals. We evaluate the CMA-NeuroES on Direct policy search five different (Markovian and non-Markovian) variants of the common pole balancing problem. The results are compared to those described in a recent study covering several RL algorithms, and the CMA-NeuroES shows the overall best performance. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Neuroevolution denotes the application of evolutionary algorithms to the design and learning of neural networks [54,11]. Accordingly, the term Neuroevolution Strategies (NeuroESs) refers to evolution strategies applied to neural networks. Evolution strategies are a major branch of evolutionary algorithms [35,40,8,2,7].
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Computation Evolution Strategies
    Evolutionary computation Lecture Evolutionary Strategies CIS 412 Artificial Intelligence Umass, Dartmouth Evolution strategies Evolution strategies • Another approach to simulating natural • In 1963 two students of the Technical University of Berlin, Ingo Rechenberg and Hans-Paul Schwefel, evolution was proposed in Germany in the were working on the search for the optimal shapes of early 1960s. Unlike genetic algorithms, bodies in a flow. They decided to try random changes in this approach − called an evolution the parameters defining the shape following the example of natural mutation. As a result, the evolution strategy strategy − was designed to solve was born. technical optimization problems. • Evolution strategies were developed as an alternative to the engineer’s intuition. • Unlike GAs, evolution strategies use only a mutation operator. Basic evolution strategy Basic evolution strategy • In its simplest form, termed as a (1+1)- evolution • Step 2 - Randomly select an initial value for each strategy, one parent generates one offspring per parameter from the respective feasible range. The set of generation by applying normally distributed mutation. these parameters will constitute the initial population of The (1+1)-evolution strategy can be implemented as parent parameters: follows: • Step 1 - Choose the number of parameters N to represent the problem, and then determine a feasible range for each parameter: • Step 3 - Calculate the solution associated with the parent Define a standard deviation for each parameter and the parameters: function to be optimized. 1 Basic evolution strategy Basic evolution strategy • Step 4 - Create a new (offspring) parameter by adding a • Step 6 - Compare the solution associated with the normally distributed random variable a with mean zero offspring parameters with the one associated with the and pre-selected deviation δ to each parent parameter: parent parameters.
    [Show full text]