2006 IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation
DOI: 10.1109/cec.2006.1688665
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Simple Cellular Genetic Algorithm for Continuous Optimization

Abstract: Cellular genetic algorithms (cGAs) are a kind of genetic algorithm (GA) -population based heuristic-with a structured population so that individuals can only interact with their neighbors. The existence of small overlapped neighborhoods in this decentralized population provides both diversity and exploration, while the exploitation of the search space is strengthened inside each neighborhood. This balance between exploration and exploitation makes cGAs naturally suitable for solving complex problems. In this p… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…5d), in line with observations made in RNA systems and supporting the intuitive notion that phenotypes formed by many genotypes are easier to access than phenotypes formed by few genotypes. When deleterious mutations were not allowed, as is the case in ''replace if better or equal'' selection strategies [9,24], the relationship between phenotypic robustness and phenotypic evolvability was lost, as measured using either E 1 p or E 2 p . Since phenotypes of lower fitness could only mutate into phenotypes of equal or higher fitness, the connectivity of a phenotype in the phenotype network was arbitrarily determined and there was consequently no relationship between these evolvability measures and phenotypic robustness.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…5d), in line with observations made in RNA systems and supporting the intuitive notion that phenotypes formed by many genotypes are easier to access than phenotypes formed by few genotypes. When deleterious mutations were not allowed, as is the case in ''replace if better or equal'' selection strategies [9,24], the relationship between phenotypic robustness and phenotypic evolvability was lost, as measured using either E 1 p or E 2 p . Since phenotypes of lower fitness could only mutate into phenotypes of equal or higher fitness, the connectivity of a phenotype in the phenotype network was arbitrarily determined and there was consequently no relationship between these evolvability measures and phenotypic robustness.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the third case, phenotypes are assigned fitness values, but deleterious mutations are not allowed. This corresponds to a ''replace if better or equal'' selection strategy [9,24]. The phenotype network is therefore modified P t p ¼ ðU p ; !…”
Section: Genotype Phenotype and Fitness Networkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the genetic framework we used, the same as that of [78], is old-fashioned and uses simple genetic operators except for the new crossover, we expect that if the proposed crossover is combined with good operators such as self-adaptive mutation of CMA-ES [26,34], it will be much more improved. Moreover, since the proposed idea is to remove the inherent bias of crossover operators in a given bounded domain, we expect that it can also be applied to other complicated crossover operators in the state-of-the-art real-coded GAs, such as G3 with PCX [16], StGA (Stochastic GA) [82], Cellular GA [20], GA with orthogonal crossover [51], and so on. However, we leave such hybridization to future work, since such improvement is beyond the scope of this paper.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A processor evaluates its individual then performs crossover or mutation with thes neighbors [6], [7], [8]. This approach is well suited for homogeneous and tighly coupled (low latency) processors, such as a supercomputer, however it has also been shown to be effective in peer-topeer environments [9].…”
Section: A Distributed Genetic Searchmentioning
confidence: 99%