skip to main content
10.1145/2908961.2931654acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Harnessing Phenotypic Diversity towards Multiple Independent Objectives

Authors Info & Claims
Published:20 July 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Multiple assessment directed novelty search (MADNS), introduced by the authors in [20], is an extension to the novelty search algorithm which exploits the observation that populations optimised for phenotypic novelty may contain solutions to multiple independent and conflicting objectives. It has been shown that, through the application of MADNS, an evolutionary trajectory may be simultaneously directed towards multiple conflicting objectives. Previous results from a series of simulated maze navigation experiments have shown that MADNS may significantly outperform novelty search in domains where the potential for phenotypic exploration is high [20]. In this paper we further explore the MADNS algorithm, assessing the effect upon the diversity and performance of the population as the phenotypic land- scape increases. A series of experiments in domains with multiple conflicting objectives and expanding areas of irrelevant space show that the relative performance gain of MADNS increases alongside the potential for exploration. We conclude that, as the potential for exploration within a domain expands, the importance of directing novelty becomes ever more necessary.

References

  1. G. Cuccu and F. Gomez. When novelty is not enough. In Applications of Evolutionary Computation, pages 234--243. Springer, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, and T. Meyarivan. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: Nsga-ii. Evolutionary Computation, IEEE Transactions on, 6(2):182--197, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. S. Doncieux and J.-B. Mouret. Dynamic behavioral diversity. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 1453--1454. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. M. G. Epitropakis, X. Li, and E. K. Burke. A dynamic archive niching differential evolution algorithm for multimodal optimization. In Evolutionary Computation (CEC), 2013 IEEE Congress on, pages 79--86. IEEE, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. J. Gomes, P. Mariano, and A. L. Christensen. Devising effective novelty search algorithms: A comprehensive empirical study. In Proceedings of the 2015 on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pages 943--950. ACM, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. J. Gomes, P. Urbano, and A. L. Christensen. Progressive minimal criteria novelty search. In Advances in Artificial Intelligence--IBERAMIA 2012, pages 281--290. Springer, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. F. J. Gomez. Sustaining diversity using behavioral information distance. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pages 113--120. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. S. Kistemaker and S. Whiteson. Critical factors in the performance of novelty search. In Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pages 965--972. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. Lehman and K. O. Stanley. Exploiting open-endedness to solve problems through the search for novelty. In ALIFE, pages 329--336, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. J. Lehman and K. O. Stanley. Efficiently evolving programs through the search for novelty. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, GECCO '10, pages 837--844. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Lehman and K. O. Stanley. Revising the evolutionary computation abstraction: minimal criteria novelty search. In Proceedings of the 12th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pages 103--110. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. J. Lehman and K. O. Stanley. Abandoning objectives: Evolution through the search for novelty alone. Evolutionary computation, 19(2):189--223, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. Lehman and K. O. Stanley. Evolving a diversity of virtual creatures through novelty search and local competition. In Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pages 211--218. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. A. Liapis, G. N. Yannakakis, and J. Togelius. Enhancements to constrained novelty search: Two-population novelty search for generating game content. In Proceedings of the 15th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pages 343--350. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. J.-B. Mouret. Novelty-based multiobjectivization. In New horizons in evolutionary robotics, pages 139--154. Springer, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. J.-B. Mouret and S. Doncieux. Encouraging behavioral diversity in evolutionary robotics: An empirical study. Evolutionary computation, 20(1):91--133, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. M. Preuss, A. Liapis, and J. Togelius. Searching for good and diverse game levels. In Computational Intelligence and Games (CIG), 2014 IEEE Conference on, pages 1--8. IEEE, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. S. Risi, S. D. Vanderbleek, C. E. Hughes, and K. O. Stanley. How novelty search escapes the deceptive trap of learning to learn. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pages 153--160. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. D. Smith, L. Tokarchuk, and C. Fernando. Evolving diverse strategies through combined phenotypic novelty and objective function search. In Applications of Evolutionary Computation, pages 344--354. Springer, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. D. Smith, L. Tokarchuk, and G. Wiggins. Exploring conflicting objectives with madns: Multiple assessment directed novelty search. In Proceedings of the Companion Publication of the 2016 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, GECCO Companion '16. ACM, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. K. O. Stanley and R. Miikkulainen. Evolving neural networks through augmenting topologies. Evolutionary computation, 10(2):99--127, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Harnessing Phenotypic Diversity towards Multiple Independent Objectives

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      GECCO '16 Companion: Proceedings of the 2016 on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion
      July 2016
      1510 pages
      ISBN:9781450343237
      DOI:10.1145/2908961

      Copyright © 2016 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 ACM 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]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 July 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      GECCO '16 Companion Paper Acceptance Rate137of381submissions,36%Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

      Upcoming Conference

      GECCO '24
      Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
      July 14 - 18, 2024
      Melbourne , VIC , Australia

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader