GA (genetic algorithm) moves away from better values

Question

Hans 2012-6-14

1
链接

此问题的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/41159-ga-genetic-algorithm-moves-away-from-better-values

I am running a ga-optimization and I often get results like this one:

                                Best           Mean      Stall
Generation      f-count        f(x)           f(x)    Generations
         932     -9.372e+005      1.231e+010        0
        1398     -1.514e+005      7.911e+009        1
        1864      7.705e+004     -3.975e+017        2
        2330     -2.988e+004     -1.812e+015        0
        2796     -2.988e+004     -1.135e+007        1
        3262     -2.988e+004     -9.866e+007        2
        3728          -563.1     -3.495e+007        3
        4194          -563.1     -8.067e+006        4
        4660          -563.1     -2.998e+007        5
        5126          -563.1     -7.216e+006        6
        5592          -563.1     -7.953e+006        7
        6058          -288.2     -3.525e+006        8
        6524           51.32     -3.823e+005        9
        6990          -40.55     -1.176e+005        0
        7456           19.38        2.5e+004        1
        7922           14.31            9165        0
        8388           14.31            8330        1
        8854           6.788            6995        0
        9320           6.788            8568        1
        9786           5.907            8970        0
       10252           1.453      1.218e+004        0

i wonder how (with an elite count set to 40 out of a population of 466) the algorithm moves to worse values first. How can this be improved? Thanks a lot for your answers!

4 个评论
显示 2更早的评论隐藏 2更早的评论

Hans 2012-6-14

You can see the function below. I just do not get why it doesnt at least keep the good individuals. I just thought I kind of use a "shotgun" and throw a larger number of individuals at it so i dont get lost in minor "valleys". Can you recommend any change in the settings or so?

function ll=bbva(param)

given=[0.9018585500777736 0.0054652585568056855 0.006730395774728828 -0.08559786078631593];

L=0.45;

theta=given(1);

mu=given(2);

sigma=given(3);

p=param(1);

q=param(2);

v=param(3);

s=param(4);

l=param(5);

m=param(6);

sigmacc=param(7);

a1=param(8);

b1=param(9);

lambdar=given(4);

lambdac=param(10);

lambdab=param(11);

Data = xlsread('bbva-spain');

r=Data(:,3);

k=Data(:,1);

f=Data(:,2);

%col=Data(:,4);

%cou=Data(:,5);

Brc=zeros(length(k),1);

Arc=zeros(length(k),1);

Brb=zeros(length(f),1);

Arb=zeros(length(f),1);

Bc=zeros(length(k),1);

Ac=zeros(length(k),1);

Bb=zeros(length(f),1);

Ab=zeros(length(f),1);

hcdach=zeros(length(k),1);

hbdach=zeros(length(f),1);

singleliker=zeros(length(k),1);

singleliker(1)=0;

singlelikec=zeros(length(k),1);

singlelikec(1)=0;

singlelikeb=zeros(length(k),1);

singlelikeb(1)=0;

singlelike=zeros(length(k),1);

singlelike(1)=0;

for i=1:length(k);

Brc(i)=(1/theta)*(1-exp(-theta*k(i)));

Arc(i)=exp((mu-sigma^2/2*theta^2)*(Brc(i)-k(i))-sigma^2*Brc(i)^2/4*theta);

Brb(i)=(1/theta)*(1-exp(-theta*f(i)));

Arb(i)=exp((mu-sigma^2/2*theta^2)*(Brb(i)-f(i))-sigma^2*Brb(i)^2/4*theta);

Bc(i)=(1/p)*(1-exp(-p*k(i)));

Ac(i)=exp((q-v^2/(2*p^2))*(Bc(i)-k(i))-(v^2*Bc(i)^2)/(4*p));

Bb(i)=(1/s)*(1-exp(-s*f(i)));

Ab(i)=exp((l-m^2/(2*s^2))*(Bb(i)-f(i))-(m^2*Bb(i)^2)/(4*s));

hcdach(i)=1/(L*Bc(i))*(log(Ac(i))-log(Data(i,4))+log(Arc(i))+(1+L*a1)*Brc(i)*r(i));

hbdach(i)=1/(L*Bb(i))*(log(Ab(i))-log(Data(i,5))+log(Arb(i))+(1+L*b1)*Brb(i)*r(i));

end

Vr=(sigma^2)/(2*theta)*(1-exp(-2*theta));

Vc=(v^2)/(2*p)*(1-exp(-2*p));

Vb=(m^2)/(2*s)*(1-exp(-2*s));

Varcou=Vb-(v*m*sigmacc)^2/Vc;

for i=2:length(k);

singleliker(i)=-1/(2*log(Vr))-(1/(2*Vr))*(r(i)-mu-(lambdar*sigma)/theta-(r(i-1)-mu-(lambdar*sigma)/theta)*exp(-theta))^2;

singlelikec(i)=-1/(2*log(Vc))-(1/(2*Vr))*(hcdach(i)-q-(lambdac*v)/p-((hcdach(i-1)-q-(lambdac*v)/p))*exp(-p))^2;

singlelikeb(i)=-1/(2*log(Varcou))-(1/(2*Varcou))*(hbdach(i)-l-(lambdab*m/s)-(hbdach(i-1)-l-(lambdab*m)/s)*exp(-s)-(sigmacc*v*m)/Vb*(hcdach(i)-q-(lambdac*v/p)-(hcdach(i-1)-q-(lambdac*v)/p)*exp(-p)))^2;

singlelike(i)=singleliker(i)+singlelikec(i)+singlelikeb(i);

end

ll=-(sum(singlelike)+(3/2)*(length(k)-1)*(2*pi));

end

Hans 2012-6-14

Could it be due to complex results (there are some logarithms in the function to be minimized)? Let's say MATLAB displays some result a, then there's actually a result a+ib with a lower absolute value or lower [minus absolue value] than one of the older results. Could that be it?

Hans 2012-6-15

I am trying again now with constraints preventing complex results. However, the algorithm is still moving away(only two generations so far becasue it needs 26500 function evaluations per generation) but still..

请先登录，再进行评论。

请先登录，再回答此问题。

Answer 1

Richard Crozier 2012-6-14

0
链接

此回答的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/41159-ga-genetic-algorithm-moves-away-from-better-values#answer_50757

But only the mean gets worse, the best improves with every generation, and this is all that matters surely?

Random combinations with nonlinear responses can easily throw up huge values which distort the mean, while not affecting the overall progress of the search.

For example, imagine the following with a population of 7:

Gen 1 scores: 100, 100, 150, 140, 111, 100, 119

best score: 100

mean score: 117.14

Gen2 scores: 87, 66, 167, 1000000000000, 55, 98, 206

best score: 55

mean score: 1.4286 x 10^11

The really bad individual would have a very low chance of passing its genes to the next generation so it's ok.

6 个评论
显示 4更早的评论隐藏 4更早的评论

Richard Crozier 2012-6-15

It still looks like it's moving towards zero? Another way to test your theory would be to modiy your function to return a poor score for complex results (e.g. 10000 * real(ll) if ll is complex or something like this) instead of the actual value of the function.

What GA are you using, is it the Matlab GA toolbox (which I haven't used) or some other one? You could try the problem out in the GA Toolbox from the University of Sheffield available here: http://www.shef.ac.uk/acse/research/ecrg/gat to see if you get the same behaviour.

Richard Crozier 2012-6-15