(μ +λ) Evolution Strategy with Socio-Cognitive Mutation

Urbanczyk, Aleksandra; Kucaba, Krzysztof; Wojtulewicz, Mateusz; Kisiel-Dorohinicki, Marek; Rutkowski, Leszek; Duda, Piotr; Kacprzyk, Janusz; Yao, Xin; Chong, Siang Yew; Byrski, Aleksander

doi:10.14313/jamris/1-2024/1

Abstract

Socio-cognitive computing is a paradigm developed for the last several years in our research group. It consists of introducing mechanisms inspired by inter-individual learning and cognition into metaheuristics. Different versions of the paradigm have been successfully applied in hybridizing Ant Colony Optimization (ACO), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), Genetic Algorithms, Differential Evolution, and Evolutionary Multi-agent System (EMAS) metaheuristics. In this paper, we have followed our previous experiences in order to propose a novel mutation based on socio-cognitive mechanism and test it based on Evolution Strategy (ES). The newly constructed versions were applied to popular benchmarks and compared with their reference versions.

References

Z. Michalewicz and D. B. Fogel, How to Solve It: Modern Heuristics. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
D. H. Wolpert and W. G. Macready, “No free lunch theorems for optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 1, no. 1, Apr. 1997, pp. 67–82, doi: 10.1109/4235.585893.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
E.-G. Talbi, Metaheuristics: From Design to Implementation. John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
K. Sörensen, “Metaheuristics—the metaphor exposed,” International Transactions in Operational Research, vol. 22, no. 1, 2015, pp. 3–18, doi: 10.1111/itor.12001.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
G. Lakoff and M. Johnson, Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2003. Accessed: Feb. 16, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo3637992.html.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
A. Bandura, “Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change,” Psychological Review, vol. 84, no. 2, 1977, pp. 191–215, doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
A. Bandura, Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. in Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, US: Prentice-Hall, Inc, 1986, pp. xiii, 617.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
A. Bandura, D. Ross, and S. A. Ross, “Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models,” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, vol. 63, no. 3, 1961, pp. 575–582, doi: 10.1037/h0045925.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
A. Byrski, et al., “Socio-cognitively inspired ant colony optimization,” Journal of Computational Science, vol. 21, Jul. 2017, pp. 397–406, doi: 10.1016/j.jocs.2016.10.010.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
I. Bugajski, et al., “Enhancing Particle Swarm Optimization with Socio-cognitive Inspirations,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 80, Jan. 2016, pp. 804–813, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2016.05.370.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
A. Urbanczyk, B. Nowak, P. Orzechowski, J. H. Moore, M. Kisiel-Dorohinicki, and A. Byrski, “Socio-cognitive Evolution Strategies,” in Computational Science – ICCS 2021, M. Paszynski, D. Kranzlmüller, V. V. Krzhizhanovskaya, J. J. Dongarra, and P. M. A. Sloot, Eds., in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021, pp. 329–342. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-77964-1_26.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
E.-G. Talbi, “A Taxonomy of Hybrid Metaheuristics,” Journal of Heuristics, vol. 8, no. 5, Sep. 2002, pp. 541–564, doi: 10.1023/A:1016540724870.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Y.-S. Ong, M.-H. Lim, N. Zhu, and K.-W. Wong, “Classification of adaptive memetic algorithms: a comparative study,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics), vol. 36, no. 1, Feb. 2006, pp. 141–152, doi: 10.1109/TSMCB.2005.856143.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Robert Schaefer, Aleksander Byrski, Joanna Kolodziej, and Maciej Smolka. An agent-based model of hierarchic genetic search. Comput. Math. Appl., 64(12):3763–3776, 2012.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kamil Pietak, Adam Wos, Aleksander Byrski, and Marek Kisiel-Dorohinicki. Functional integrity of multi-agent computational system supported by component-based implementation. In Vladimír Marík, Thomas I. Strasser, and Alois Zoitl, editors, Holonic and Multi-Agent Systems for Manufacturing, 4th International Conference on Industrial Applications of Holonic and Multi- Agent Systems, HoloMAS 2009, Linz, Austria, August 31 - September 2, 2009. Proceedings, volume 5696 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 82–91. Springer, 2009.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Robert Schaefer, Aleksander Byrski, and Maciej Smolka. Stochastic model of evolutionary and immunological multi-agent systems: Parallel execution of local actions. Fundam. Informaticae, 95(2-3):325–348, 2009.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
I. Rechenberg, Cybernetic Solution Path of an Experimental Problem by Ingo Rechenberg. Royal Aircraft Establishment, 1965.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
H.-P. Schwefel, Numerische Optimierung von Computer-Modellen mittels der Evolutions strategie: Mit einer vergleichenden Einführung in die Hill-Climbing- und Zufallsstrategie. Basel: Birkhäuser, 1977. doi: 10. 1007/978-3-0348-5927-1.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
D. V. Arnold, “Weighted multirecombination evolution strategies,” Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 361, no. 1, Aug. 2006, pp. 18–37, doi: 10.1016/j.tcs.2006.04.003.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
D. Brockhoff, A. Auger, N. Hansen, D. V. Arnold, and T. Hohm, “Mirrored Sampling and Sequential Selection for Evolution Strategies,” in Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, PPSN XI, R. Schaefer, C. Cotta, J. Kołodziej, and G. Rudolph, Eds., in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2010, pp. 11–21. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-15844-5_2.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
T.-Y. Huang and Y.-Y. Chen, “Modified evolution strategies with a diversity-based parentinclusion scheme,” in Proceedings of the 2000. IEEE International Conference on Control Applications. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.00CH37162), Sep. 2000, pp. 379–384. doi: 10.1109/CCA.2000.897454.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
N. Hansen and A. Ostermeier, “Completely Derandomized Self-Adaptation in Evolution Strategies,” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 9, no. 2, Jun. 2001, pp. 159–195, doi: 10.1162/1063 65601750190398.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
P. P. Repoussis, C. D. Tarantilis, O. Bräysy, and G. Ioannou, “A hybrid evolution strategy for the open vehicle routing problem,” Computers & Operations Research, vol. 37, no. 3, Mar. 2010, pp. 443–455, doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2008.11.003.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
D. Koulocheris, H. Vrazopoulos, and V. Dertimanis, “Hybrid evolution strategy for the design of welded beams,” in Proc. of Int. Congress on Evolutionary Methods for Design, Optimization and Control with Applications to Industrial Problems EUROGEN 2003, 2003.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
L. Dos Santos Coelho and P. Alotto, “Electromagnetic device optimization by hybrid evolution strategy approaches,” COMPEL – The international journal for computation and mathematics in electrical and electronic engineering, vol. 26, no. 2, Apr. 2007, pp. 269–279, doi: 10.1108/03321640710727638.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
R. Storn and K. Price, “Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces,” Journal of Global Optimization, vol. 11, no. 4, Dec. 1997, pp. 341–359, doi: 10.1023/A:1008202821328.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kenneth Price, Rainer M. Storn, and Jouni A. Lampinen. Differential Evolution. in Natural Computing Series. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer- Verlag, 2005. doi: 10.1007/3-540-31306-0.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
C.-L. Hwang, Y.-J. Lai, and T.-Y. Liu, “A new approach for multiple objective decision making,” Computers & Operations Research, vol. 20, no. 8, Oct. 1993, pp. 889–899, doi: 10.1016/0305-0548(93)90109-V.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
M. Nabywaniec, et al., “Socio-cognitive Optimization of Time-delay Control Problems using Agent-based Metaheuristics,” in 2022 IEEE 11th International Conference on Intelligent Systems (IS), Oct. 2022, pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1109/IS57118. 2022.10019693.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
P. Kipinski, et al., “Socio-cognitive Optimization of Time-delay Control Problems using Evolutionary Metaheuristics.” arXiv, Oct. 23, 2022. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2210.12872.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
J. Dieterich and B. Hartke, “Empirical Review of Standard Benchmark Functions Using Evolutionary Global Optimization,” Applied Mathematics, vol. 03, Jul. 2012, doi: 10.4236/am.2012.330215.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
M. López-Ibáñez, J. Dubois-Lacoste, L. Pérez Cáceres, M. Birattari, and T. Stützle, “The irace package: Iterated racing for automatic algorithm configuration,” Operations Research Perspectives, vol. 3, Jan. 2016, pp. 43–58, doi: 10.1016/j.orp.2016.09.002.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

(μ +λ) Evolution Strategy with Socio-Cognitive Mutation

Abstract

Paradigm

My account