2008
DOI: 10.1145/1527063.1527066
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Geva

Abstract: Publication informationSIGEVOLution, 3 (2): 17-22Publisher ACM Link to online version http://dx

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Grammatical Evolution [23,24,21,11] is an evolutionary technique that is able to represent individuals by means of grammars. GE is a form of Genetic Programming (GP) [17] which evolves programs that are evaluated according their fitness values.…”
Section: Grammatical Evolutionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Grammatical Evolution [23,24,21,11] is an evolutionary technique that is able to represent individuals by means of grammars. GE is a form of Genetic Programming (GP) [17] which evolves programs that are evaluated according their fitness values.…”
Section: Grammatical Evolutionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The genotype or phenotype (e.g., is a part of genotype) mapping indicates that in lieu of operating particularly on solution trees, as in the standard GP, the GE permits search operators to be executed on the genotype (e.g., binary or integer genes), moreover, partially resulting phenotypes, and the wholly formed phenotypic derivation trees themselves. One of the advantages of GE is that this mapping explains the use of search to various programming languages and other structures [83], [100], [116], [117]. Table 5 summarizes some applications of the GEGP.…”
Section: Grammatical Evolution Genetic Programming (Gegp)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Type of GP Advantages Disadvantages Tree-based (TGP) [77], [100], [103]  Higher-order functions are a powerful addition to the TGP which enables the evolution of programs with greater than constant-time complexity  Closure (having the same data type between operators and terminals), which causes to increase the AC in the multiple data type problems  High AC in the Lawnmower and H-IFF problems Stack-based (SGP) [80], [94], [95], [113], [114], [120]  High performance on symbolic regression problem  Low AC (outperforms the TGP)  Efficient performance in parallel computing  Inefficient performance where long programs (variables) are pushed in the stack on limited resources systems  It can only be implemented on stack support languages. Linear (LGP) [81]  High flexibility (e.g., allows more freedom on the internal representation)  Low AC  Allowing a more efficient evaluation of programs  Higher compiler overhead than the TGP Grammatical Evolution (GEGP) [78], [83], [100], [121], [124]  The flexibility of language choice that it allows (e.g. the user could output algorithm in any language and utilize a compiler for that language to write an executable code to calculate a fitness).…”
Section: Table 10 Advantages and Disadvantages Of Various Types Of Gpsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To implement our GEA, we have used GEVA [37], a well-known GE tool developed in Java. The distributed pGEA version is made by adding the DEVS/SOA framework, which will use multiple processors when available.…”
Section: Case Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%