The Limits of Estimation of Distribution Algorithms

Article Preview

Abstract:

In this paper, we study the ability limit of EDAs to effectively solve problems in relation to the number of interactions among the variables. More in particular, we numerically analyze the learning limits that different EDA implementations encounter to solve problems on a sequence of additively decomposable functions (ADFs) in which new sub-functions are progressively added. The study is carried out in a worst-case scenario where the sub-functions are defined as deceptive functions. We argue that the limits for this type of algorithm are mainly imposed by the probabilistic model they rely on. Beyond the limitations of the approximate learning methods, the results suggest that, in general, the use of bayesian networks can entail strong computational restrictions to overcome the limits of applicability.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 926-930)

Pages:

3294-3297

Citation:

Online since:

May 2014

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2014 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] A. A. Zhigljavsky. Theory of Global Random Search. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, (1991).

Google Scholar

[2] A. Brownlee, J. McCall, and S. Shakya. Structure learning and optimization in a Markov-network based estimation of distribution algorithm. In Proceedings of the Eleventh conference on Congress on Evolutionary Computation, p.447–454, Piscataway, IEEE Press, (2009).

DOI: 10.1109/cec.2009.4982980

Google Scholar

[3] D. J. Coffin, and R. E. Smith. The limitations of distribution sampling for linkage learning. In Proceedings of the 2007 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, p.364–369, Singapore, IEEE Press. (2007).

DOI: 10.1109/cec.2007.4424494

Google Scholar

[4] Y. Gao and J. C. Culberson. Space complexity of estimation of distribution algorithms. Evolutionary Computation, 13(1): 125–143, (2005).

DOI: 10.1162/1063656053583423

Google Scholar