Skip to main content

Applying family competition to evolution strategies for constrained optimization

  • Issues in Evolutionary Optimization
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Evolutionary Programming VI (EP 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1213))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper applies family competition to evolution strategies to solve constrained optimization problems. The family competition of Family Competition Evolution Strategy (FCES) can be viewed as a local competition involving the children generated from the same parent, while the selection is a global competition among all of the members in the population. According to our experimental results, the self-adaptation of strategy parameters with deterministic elitist selection may trap ESs into local optima when they are applied to heavy constrained optimization problems. By controlling strategy parameters with non-self adaptive rule, FCES can reduce the computation time of self-adaptive Gaussian mutation, diminish the complexity of selection from (m+1) to (m+m), and avoid to be premature. Therefore, FCES is capable of obtaining better performance and saving the computation time. In this paper, FCES is compared with other evolutionary algorithms on various benchmark problems and the results indicate that FCES is a powerful optimization technique.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. A.H. Wright, “Genetic Algorithm for Real Parameter Optimization,” in Proc. of the Fourth lnt'l Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, 1991, pp. 205–218.

    Google Scholar 

  2. D.B. Fogel and J.W. Atmar, “Comparing Genetic Operators with Gaussian Mutations in Simulated Evolutionary Processes Using Linear Systems,” Biological Cybernetics, vol. 63, 1993, pp. 111–114.

    Google Scholar 

  3. D.B. Fogel, “An Introduction to Simulated Evolutionary Optimization,” IEEE Trans. on Neural Networks, vol. 5, no. 1, Jan. 1994, pp. 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. D.E. Goldberg, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization & Machine Learning, Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  5. F. Hoffmeister and T. Bäck, “Genetic Algorithms and Evolution Strategies.” Similarities and Difference,” in Proc. of the First International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, 1991, pp. 455–470.

    Google Scholar 

  6. H.P. Schwefel, Numerical Optimization for Computer Models. Chichester, UK:Wiley 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  7. L.J Eshelman and J.D. Schaffer, “Real-Coded Genetic Algorithms and Interval-Schemata,” in Proc. of Foundations of Genetic Algorithms:2, 1993, pp. 187–202.

    Google Scholar 

  8. McDonnell and D.E. Wagen,“An Empirical Study of Recombination in Evolutionary Search,” in Proc. of Evolutionary Programming IV, 1995, pp. 465–478.

    Google Scholar 

  9. T. Bäck, F. Hoffmeister and H.P. Schwefel, “ A survey of Evolution Strategies,” in Proc. of the Fourth Int'l Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, 1991, pp. 2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  10. D.B. Fogel, “A Comparison of Evolutionary Programming and Genetic Algorithm on selected Constrained Optimization Problems,” Simulation, June 1995, pp. 397–404.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. Homaifar, A.H.-Y Lai and X. Qi, “Constrained Optimization via Genetic Algorithms,” Simulation, vol. 2, no. 4, 1994, pp. 242–254.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Z. Michalewicz, “A Survey of Constraint Handing Techniques in Evolutionary Computation methods,” in Proc. of Evolutionary Programming IV, 1995, pp. 135–155

    Google Scholar 

  13. C.A. Floudas, and P.M. Pardalos, “ A Collection of Test Problems for Constrained Global Optimization Algorithm,” Springer-Verlag, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.455, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  14. W. Hock and K. Schittkowski, “Test examples for Nonlinear Programming Codes,” Springer-Verlag, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical systems, vol. 187, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J.A. Joines and C.R. Houck, “On the Use of Non-Stationary Penalty Functions to Solve Nonlinear Constrained Optimization Problems with GAs”, in Proc. of the IEEE Int'l Conf. on Evolutionary Computation, 1994, pp. 579–584.

    Google Scholar 

  16. D. Powell and M.M. Skolnick, “Using Genetic Algorithms in Engineering Design Optimization with Non-Linear Constraints,” in Proc. of the Fifth Int'l Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, 1993, pp.424–430.

    Google Scholar 

  17. M. Schoenauer and S. Xanthakis, “Constrained GA optimization,” in Proc. of the Fifth Int'l Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, 1993, pp. 573–580

    Google Scholar 

  18. Z. Michalewicz, “Genetic Algorithms, Numerical Optimization, and Constrains,” in Proc. of the Sixth Int'l Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, 1995, pp.151–158.

    Google Scholar 

  19. R. G.Reynolds, Z. Michalewicz and M. Cavaretta, “Using Cultural Algorithm for Constraint Handling in Genocop,” in Proc. of Evolutionary Programming IV, 1995, pp. 289–305.

    Google Scholar 

  20. J.H. Holland, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems, MIT Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  21. J.T. Richardson, M.R. Palmer, G. Liepins and M. Hilliard, “Some Guidelines for Genetic Algorithms with Penalty Functions,” in Proc. of the Third Int'l Conf. on Genetic Algorithm, 1989, pp. 191–197.

    Google Scholar 

  22. D. Orvosh, and L. Davis, “ Shall We Repair? Genetic Algorithms, Combinatorial Optimization, and Feasibility Constraints,” in Proc. of the Fifth Int'l Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, 1993, pp. 650.

    Google Scholar 

  23. J. Paredis, “Co-evolutionary Constraint Satisfaction,” PPSN, Springer-Verlag, 1994, pp. 46–55.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Z. Michalewicz and C. Janikow, “Handling Constraints in Genetic Algorithms,” in Proc. of the Fourth Int'l Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, 1991, pp. 151–157.

    Google Scholar 

  25. D. M. Himmelblau, Applied Nonlinear Programming, Mcgraw-Hill, New York, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  26. H. Myung and J.H. Kim, “Constrained Optimization Using Two-Phase Evolutionary Programming,” in Proc. of the IEEE Int'l Conf. on Evolutionary Computation, 1996, pp. 262–267.

    Google Scholar 

  27. H. Myung, J.H. Kim and D.B.Fogel, “Preliminary Investigations into a Two-Stage Method of Evolutionary Optimization on Constrained Problems,” in Proc. of the Third Annual Conf. on Evolutionary Programming, 1995, pp. 449–463.

    Google Scholar 

  28. J. M. Yang and C.Y. Kao, “A Combined Simulated Evolutionary Algorithm for Real Parameter Optimization,” in Proc. of the IEEE Int'l Conf. on Evolutionary Computation, 1996, pp.732–737.

    Google Scholar 

  29. J. M. Yang, C.Y. Kao and J.T. Horng, “Evolving Neural Induction Regular Language Using Combined Evolutionary Algorithms,” in Proc. of the 9th International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, 1996, pp. 162–169.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Peter J. Angeline Robert G. Reynolds John R. McDonnell Russ Eberhart

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Yang, JM., Chen, YP., Horng, JT., Kao, CY. (1997). Applying family competition to evolution strategies for constrained optimization. In: Angeline, P.J., Reynolds, R.G., McDonnell, J.R., Eberhart, R. (eds) Evolutionary Programming VI. EP 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1213. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0014812

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0014812

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-62788-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68518-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics