Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Inheritable Epigenetics in Genetic Programming

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Genetic Programming Theory and Practice XII

Part of the book series: Genetic and Evolutionary Computation ((GEVO))

Abstract

Classical genetic programming solves problems by applying the Darwinian concepts of selection, survival and reproduction to a population of computer programs. Here we extend the biological analogy to incorporate epigenetic regulation through both learning and evolution. We begin the chapter with a discussion of Darwinian, Lamarckian, and Baldwinian approaches to evolutionary computation and describe how recent findings in biology differ conceptually from the computational strategies that have been proposed. Using inheritable Lamarckian mechanisms as inspiration, we propose a system that allows for updating of individuals in the population during their lifetime while simultaneously preserving both genotypic and phenotypic traits during reproduction. The implementation is made simple through the use of syntax-free, developmental, linear genetic programming. The representation allows for arbitrarily-ordered genomes to be syntactically valid programs, thereby creating a genetic programming approach upon which quasi-uniform epigenetic updating and inheritance can easily be applied. Generational updates are made using an epigenetic hill climber (EHC), and the epigenetic properties of genes are inherited during crossover and mutation. The addition of epigenetics results in faster convergence, less bloat, and an improved ability to find exact solutions on a number of symbolic regression problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note that these definitions distinguish between the program, the resulting equation, and its fitness, unlike in traditional GP.

References

  • Banzhaf W (1994) Genotype-phenotype-mapping and neutral variationa case study in genetic programming. Parallel problem solving from naturePPSN III. Springer, p 322–332. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-58484-6-276

  • Bongard J, Lipson H (2007) Automated reverse engineering of nonlinear dynamical systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(24):9943–9948. http://www.pnas.org/content/104/24/9943.short

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bongard JC, Pfeifer R (2001) Repeated structure and dissociation of genotypic and phenotypic complexity in artificial ontogeny. Proceedings of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference, p 829–836. http://www.cems.uvm.edu/~jbongard/papers/geccoBongard2001.pdf

  • Brameier M, Banzhaf W (2007) Linear genetic programming, vol 1, 1st edn. Springer Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C (1872) The origin of species by means of natural selection: or, the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life and the descent of man and selection in relation to sex. Modern Library, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Dias BG, Ressler KJ (2013) PACAP and the PAC1 receptor in post-traumatic stress disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology 38(1):245–246. doi:10.1038/npp.2012.147. http://www.nature.com/npp/ journal/v38/n1/full/npp2012147a.html

  • Dias BG, Ressler KJ (2014) Parental olfactory experience influences behavior and neural structure in subsequent generations. Nat Neurosci 17(1):89–96. doi:10.1038/nn. http://www.nature.com/ neuro/journal/v17/n1/full/nn.3594.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira C (2001) Gene expression programming: a new adaptive algorithm for solving problems. Complex Syst 13(2):87–129. arXiv:cs/0102027. http://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0102027

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fontana A (2011) Epigenetic tracking: biological implications. In: Kampis G, Karsai I, Szathmry E (eds) Advances in artificial life. Darwin Meets von Neumann, no. 5777 in Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 10–17. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-21283-3-2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Giraud-Carrier C (2002) Unifying learning with evolution through baldwinian evolution and lamarckism. In Advances in Computational Intelligence and Learning (pp. 159–168). Springer Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruau F, Whitley D (1993) Adding learning to the cellular development of neural networks: evolution and the baldwin effect. Evolut Comput 1(3):213–233. doi:10.1162/evco.1993.1.3.213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/evco.1993.1.3.213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoai NX, McKay RI, Essam D, Chau R (2002) Solving the symbolic regression problem with tree-adjunct grammar guided genetic programming: the comparative results. Evolutionary computation, 2002. CEC'02. Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on, IEEE, vol 2, p 1326–1331. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs-all.jsp?arnumber=1004435

  • Holliday R (2006) Epigenetics: a historical overview. Epigenetics 1(2). http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/epigenetics/holliday EPI1-2.pdf

  • Iba H (2008) Inference of differential equation models by genetic programming. Inf Sci 178(23):4453–4468. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2008.07.029. (special Section: Genetic and Evolutionary Computing)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jablonka E, Lamb MJ (2002) The changing concept of epigenetics. Ann NY Acad Sci 981(1):82–96. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2002.t b04913.x/full

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones PA, Takai D (2001) The role of DNA methylation in mammalian epigenetics. Science 293(5532):1068–1070. doi:10.1126/science.1063852. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/293/5532/1068, PMID: 11498573

  • Kaati G, Bygren LO, Edvinsson S (2002) Cardiovascular and diabetes mortality determined by nutrition during parents` and grandparents` slow growth period. Eur J Hum Genet 10(11):68–2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kommenda M, Kronberger G, Winkler S, Affenzeller M, Wagner S (2013) Effects of constant optimization by nonlinear least squares minimization in symbolic regression. In: Blum C, Alba E, Bartz-Beielstein T, Loiacono D, Luna F, Mehnen J, Ochoa G, Preuss M, Tantar E, Vanneschi L (eds) GECCO '13 companion: proceeding of the fifteenth annual conference companion on genetic and evolutionary computation conference companion. ACM, Amsterdam, p 1121–1128. doi:10.1145/2464576.2482691

    Google Scholar 

  • Koza JR (1992) Genetic programming: on the programming of computers by means of natural selection. MIT Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Krawiec K, Pawlak T (2013) Locally geometric semantic crossover: a study on the roles of semantics and homology in recombination operators. Genet Program Evolvable Mach 14(1):31–63. doi:10.1007/s10710-012-9172-7. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10710-012-9172-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Cava W (2014a) Develep (Version 1.0.0) [software]. doi:10.5281/zenodo.9824. Retrieved from https://zenodo.org/record/9824

  • La Cava W, Spector L, Danai K, Lackner M (2014b) Evolving differential equations with developmental linear genetic programming and epigenetic hill climbing. GECCO '14: companion publication of the 2014 genetic and evolutionary computation conference. ACM. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2598394.2598491

  • Mahfoud SW (1995) Niching methods for genetic algorithms. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller JF, Thomson P (2000) Cartesian genetic programming. Genetic programming. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, p 121–132. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-46239-2-9

  • Mingo J, Aler R (2007) Grammatical evolution guided by reinforcement. IEEE congress on evolutionary computation. CEC 2007, pp 1475–1482. 10.1109/CEC.2007.4424646

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordin P, Francone F, Banzhaf W (1995) Explicitly defined introns and destructive crossover in genetic programming. In: Rosca JP (ed) Proceedings of the workshop on genetic programming: from theory to real-world applications. Tahoe City, p 6–22. http://web.cs.mun.ca/banzhaf/papers/ML95.pdf

  • ONeill M, Vanneschi L, Gustafson S, Banzhaf W (2010) Open issues in genetic programming. Genet Program Evolvable Mach 11(3–4):339–363. doi:10.1007/s10710-010-9113-2. http://link.springer.com/ article/10.1007/s10710-010-9113–2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page J, Poli R, Langdon WB (1999) Smooth uniform crossover with smooth point mutation in genetic programming: a preliminary study. Genetic programming, proceedings of EuroGP'99, vol 1598 of LNCS, Springer-Verlag, pp 39–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagie L, Hogeweg P (1997) Evolutionary consequences of coevolving targets. Evol Comput 5(4):401–418. http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/evco.1997.5.4.401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pogribny I, Raiche J, Slovack M, Kovalchuk O (2004) Dose-dependence, sex- and tissue-specificity, and persistence of radiation-induced genomic DNA methylation changes. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 320(4):1253–1261. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.06.081. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006291X 040 13208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross BJ (1999) A lamarckian evolution strategy for genetic algorithms. Pract Handb Genet Algorithms Complex Codin Syst 3:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan C (1996) Reducing premature convergence in evolutionary algorithms. PhD thesis, National University of Ireland

    Google Scholar 

  • Salman WP, Tisserand O, Toulout B, Stewart M (1985) Forth. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt M, Lipson H (2007) Comparison of tree and graph encodings as function of problem complexity. Proceedings of the 9th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, ACM, New York, GECCO '07, p 674–1679. doi:10.1145/1276958.1277288. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1276958.1277288

  • Schmidt M, Lipson H (2011) Age-fitness pareto optimization. Genetic programming theory and practice VIII, p 129–146. Springer New York.http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4419-7747-2-8

  • Spector L (2001) Autoconstructive evolution: Push, pushGP, and pushpop. Proceedings of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference GECCO-2001, p 137–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector L, Helmuth T (2013) Uniform linear transformation with repair and alternation in genetic programming. Genetic programming theory and practice XI, page in preparation Springer. http://people.cs.umass.edu/ thelmuth/Pubs/ultra-gptp-2013-preprint.pdf

  • Spector L, Robinson A (2002) Genetic programming and autoconstructive evolution with the push programming language. Genet Program Evolv Mach 3(1):7–40. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1014538503543

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tanev I, Yuta K (2008) Epigenetic programming:genetic programming incorporating epigenetic learning through modification of histones. Inf Sci 178(23):4469–4481.doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2008.07.027. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0020025508002880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topchy A, Punch WF (2001) Faster genetic programming based on local gradient search of numeric leaf values. Proceedings of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference GECCO-2001, p 155–162. http://garage.cse.msu.edu/papers/GARAGe01-07-01.pdf

  • Turner BM (2000) Histone acetylation and an epigenetic code. Bioessays 22(9):836–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uy NQ, Hoai NX, ONeill M, McKay RI, Galvn-Lpez E (2011) Semantically-based crossover in genetic programming: application to real-valued symbolic regression. Genet Program Evolv Mach 12(2):91–119. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10710-010-9121-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White DR, McDermott J, Castelli M, Manzoni L, Goldman BW, Kronberger G, Jakowski W, OReilly UM, Luke S (2012) Better GP benchmarks: community survey results and proposals. Genet Program Evolv Mach 14(1):3–29. doi:10.1007/s10710-012-9177-2. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10710-012-9177-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley D, Gordon VS, Mathias K (1994) Lamarckian evolution, the baldwin effect and function optimization. Parallel problem solving from NaturePPSN III. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, p 5–15. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-58484-6-245\

  • Wineberg M, Christensen S (2004) An introduction to statistics for EC experimental analysis. http://www.cis.uoguelph.ca/wineberg/publications/ECStat2004.pdf . Accessed 10 June 2014

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Thomas Helmuth for his insightful feedback and Professor Kourosh Danai for his support of this research, as well as the members of the Hampshire Computational Intelligence Laboratory. This work is partially supported by the NSF-sponsored IGERT: Offshore Wind Energy Engineering, Environmental Science, and Policy (Grant Number 1068864), as well as Grant No. 1017817. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA

    William La Cava

  2. School of Cognitive Science, Hampshire College, MA, 01002-3359, Amherst, USA

    Lee Spector

Authors
  1. William La Cava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lee Spector
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William La Cava .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for the Study of Complex Systems (CSCS), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Rick Riolo

  2. Evolution Enterprises, Milan, Michigan, USA

    William P. Worzel

  3. Evolved Analytics, Midland, Michigan, USA

    Mark Kotanchek

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

La Cava, W., Spector, L. (2015). Inheritable Epigenetics in Genetic Programming. In: Riolo, R., Worzel, W., Kotanchek, M. (eds) Genetic Programming Theory and Practice XII. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16030-6_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16030-6_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16029-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16030-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation