Approximation capabilities of multilayer feedforward networks
Neural Networks
Evolving neural networks through augmenting topologies
Evolutionary Computation
Invariance, Self-Adaptation and Correlated Mutations and Evolution Strategies
PPSN VI Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature
A Taxonomy for artificial embryogeny
Artificial Life
Compositional pattern producing networks: A novel abstraction of development
Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines
Dynamical blueprints: exploiting levels of system-environment interaction
Proceedings of the 9th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation
A novel generative encoding for exploiting neural network sensor and output geometry
Proceedings of the 9th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation
A Simple Modification in CMA-ES Achieving Linear Time and Space Complexity
Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature: PPSN X
Experimental Comparisons of Derivative Free Optimization Algorithms
SEA '09 Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Experimental Algorithms
When and why development is needed: generative and developmental systems
Proceedings of the 11th Annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation
Lower Bounds for Comparison Based Evolution Strategies Using VC-dimension and Sign Patterns
Algorithmica - Special Issue: Theory of Evolutionary Computation
Robustness and the Halting Problem for Multicellular Artificial Ontogeny
IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation
A developmental solution to (dynamic) capacitated arc routing problems using genetic programming
Proceedings of the 14th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation
Hi-index | 0.00 |
This paper presents a comparative study of two indirect solution representations, a generative and an ontogenic one, on a set of well-known 2D truss design problems. The generative representation encodes the parameters of a trusses design as a mapping from a 2D space. The ontogenic representation encodes truss design parameters as a local truss transformation iterated several times, starting from a trivial initial truss. Both representations are tested with a naive evolution strategy based optimization scheme, as well as the state of the art HyperNEAT approach. We focus both on the best objective value obtained and the computational cost to reach a given level of optimality. The study shows that the two solution representations behave very differently. For experimental settings with equal complexity, with the same optimization scheme and settings, the generative representation provides results which are far from optimal, whereas the ontogenic representation delivers near-optimal solutions. The ontogenic representation is also much less computationally expensive than a direct representation until very close to the global optimum. The study questions the scalability of the generative representations, while the results for the ontogenic representation display much better scalability.