Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference 2019
DOI: 10.1145/3321707.3321752
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Novelty search

Abstract: Novelty Search is an exploration algorithm driven by the novelty of a behavior. The same individual evaluated at different generations has different fitness values. The corresponding fitness landscape is thus constantly changing and if, at the scale of a single generation, the metaphor of a fitness landscape with peaks and valleys still holds, this is not the case anymore at the scale of the whole evolutionary process. How does this kind of algorithms behave? Is it possible to define a model that would help un… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As mentioned above, similar work [27] would use K-Nearest Neighbours when evaluating for diversity, but the technique used to measure the diversity among multiple behaviours was handled differently for this research. While other work would use the Euclidean distances between the characterization vectors (with the characterization vector components reflecting each behaviour) [49], this research used sum of ranks to achieve a score for the distances of each separate component in the characterization vectors, as mentioned in Chapter 3. The differences between these techniques were not the focus of this research, but empirical analysis suggests that the use of sum of ranks mitigates the risk of particular behaviours dominating the score.…”
Section: Multi-objectivizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As mentioned above, similar work [27] would use K-Nearest Neighbours when evaluating for diversity, but the technique used to measure the diversity among multiple behaviours was handled differently for this research. While other work would use the Euclidean distances between the characterization vectors (with the characterization vector components reflecting each behaviour) [49], this research used sum of ranks to achieve a score for the distances of each separate component in the characterization vectors, as mentioned in Chapter 3. The differences between these techniques were not the focus of this research, but empirical analysis suggests that the use of sum of ranks mitigates the risk of particular behaviours dominating the score.…”
Section: Multi-objectivizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Novelty provides a deterministic solution to this trade-off [116]. Novelty search at steady state would allow for uniform sampling of the reachable phenotypic space [43]. Compare this with sampling the design/genotype space, which is easy to do with random mutagenesis or recombination, but provides no guarantees about observing diverse functionalities, a property of the more complex phenotypic space.…”
Section: Novelty Before Fitnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Throughout exploration, the IMGEP dynamically refines its Z-traversal strategy based on the knowledge acquired by its discoveries. Here we opt for a simple IMGEP variant such that the exploration process can be seen as performing novelty search in behavior space Z [104]. The pseudocode of our IMGEP pipeline is shown in Figure 1-c and details about the internal models are provided in Materials and Methods.…”
Section: Curiosity Search Uncovers a Diversity Of Reachable Goal Statesmentioning
confidence: 99%