Quality and Diversity Optimization: A Unifying Modular Framework
The optimization of functions to find the best solution according to one or several objectives has a central role in many engineering and research fields. Recently, a new family of optimization algorithms, named quality-diversity (QD) optimization, has been introduced, and contrasts with classic alg...
Uložené v:
| Vydané v: | IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation Ročník 22; číslo 2; s. 245 - 259 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autori: | , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | English |
| Vydavateľské údaje: |
IEEE
01.04.2018
|
| Predmet: | |
| ISSN: | 1089-778X, 1941-0026 |
| On-line prístup: | Získať plný text |
| Tagy: |
Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
|
| Shrnutí: | The optimization of functions to find the best solution according to one or several objectives has a central role in many engineering and research fields. Recently, a new family of optimization algorithms, named quality-diversity (QD) optimization, has been introduced, and contrasts with classic algorithms. Instead of searching for a single solution, QD algorithms are searching for a large collection of both diverse and high-performing solutions. The role of this collection is to cover the range of possible solution types as much as possible, and to contain the best solution for each type. The contribution of this paper is threefold. First, we present a unifying framework of QD optimization algorithms that covers the two main algorithms of this family (multidimensional archive of phenotypic elites and the novelty search with local competition), and that highlights the large variety of variants that can be investigated within this family. Second, we propose algorithms with a new selection mechanism for QD algorithms that outperforms all the algorithms tested in this paper. Lastly, we present a new collection management that overcomes the erosion issues observed when using unstructured collections. These three contributions are supported by extensive experimental comparisons of QD algorithms on three different experimental scenarios. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1089-778X 1941-0026 |
| DOI: | 10.1109/TEVC.2017.2704781 |