Upload
zainul-anwar
View
224
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
1/53
Runtime Analysis of Evolutionary Algorithms
Per Kristian Lehre
School of Computer ScienceUniversity of Nottingham
Functional Programming Laboratory Seminar
Nottingham, November 25th 2011
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
2/53
Black Box Optimisation
Function class F
f : X → R
Photo: E. Gerhard (1846).
f (x1), f (x2), f (x3),...,f (xt) x1, x2, x3,...,xt
[Droste et al., 2006]
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
3/53
Evolutionary Algorithms
Selection
Variation
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
4/53
Meta-heuristics in Operations Research
Meta-heuristics are practical optimisation-techniques
a pragmatic approach to NP-hard optimisation problems
easy to implement, adaptable to many problem domains
often produces solutions of strikingly good quality
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
5/53
A Theory of Meta-heuristics?
Weak theoretical foundation has been a major critique
lack of performance guarantees
impact of parameter settings poorly understood
no deep understanding of how and why they work
Largely ignored by the general theory community
not “real algorithms”
no guarantees about performance
mathematically very challenging
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
6/53
An Important Challenge...
“Developing the mathematical methodology for
explaining and predicting the performance of these and
other heuristics is one of the most important challenges
facing the fields of optimization and algorithms today.”
Papadimitriou and Steiglitz (1998)
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
7/53
Outline
Introduction
Runtime AnalysisBasic DefinitionsOverview of Results
Evolutionary AlgorithmsExploration vs ExploitationAnalytical Techniques
Directions for Further Work
Heuristic UnderstandingSystems to Build Systems
Conclusion
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
8/53
Runtime Analysis of Meta-heuristics
General Practical Question
Under what conditions will a given heuristic returnsolutions of acceptable quality within reasonable time?
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
9/53
Runtime Analysis of Meta-heuristics
General Practical Question
Under what conditions will a given heuristic returnsolutions of acceptable quality within reasonable time?
Theoretical Approach The runtime of a heuristic on a problem is
iterations until optimal (or approximate) solution found
Analysis of how the runtime depends on
1. problem characteristics2. parameters of the heuristic
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
10/53
Meta-heuristics are Randomised Algorithms
(1+1) EA on Easy FSM instance (n=200).
Number of iterations.
D e n s i t y
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
0 e + 0 0
4 e − 0 4
8 e − 0 4
DefinitionThe expected runtime of an algorithm A on function class F is
T A,F := maxf ∈F
E [T A,f ]
where T A,f is number of f -evaluations before optimum found.
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
11/53
Expected runtime as a function of problem instance size
4 5 6 7 8 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
0 e + 0 0
4 e + 0 6
8 e + 0 6
RS on Easy FSM instance class.
Number of states in FSM (n).
I t e r a t i o n s o f R S .
Exponential =⇒ Algorithm impractical on problem.
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
12/53
Expected runtime as a function of problem instance size
10 60 160 260 360 460 560 660 760
0
2 0 0 0
6 0
0 0
1 0 0 0 0
(1+1) EA on Easy FSM instance class.
Number of states in FSM (n).
I t e r a t i o n s
o f ( 1 + 1 ) E A .
Exponential =⇒ Algorithm impractical on problem. Polynomial =⇒ Possibly efficient algorithm.
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
13/53
Analytical Tool Box
Artificial Fitness Levels
[Wegener and Witt, 2005, Lehre, 2011a] Concentration of measure
[Dubhashi and Panconesi, 2009]
Typical Runs
Expected Multiplicative Weight Decrease[Neumann and Wegener, 2007]
Drift Analysis [Hajek, 1982]
Branching Processes [Lehre and Yao, 2009]
Electrical Resistive Networks[Lehre and Haddow, 2006]
Yao’s Minimax Principle[Motwani and Raghavan, 1995]
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
14/53
OneMax (1+1) EA O(n log n) [Mühlenbein, 1992](1+λ) EA O(λn + n log n) [Jansen et al., 2005](µ+1) EA O(µn + n log n) [Witt, 2006]
1-ANT O(n2) w.h.p. [Neumann and Witt, 2006](µ+1) IA O(µn + n log n) [Zarges, 2009]
Linear Functions (1+1) EA Θ(n log n) [Droste et al., 2002] and[He and Yao, 2003]
cGA Θ(n2+ε), ε > 0 const. [Droste, 2006]
Max. Matching (1+1) EA eΩ(n), PRAS [Giel and Wegener, 2003]
Sorting (1+1) EA Θ(n2 log n) [Scharnow et al., 2002]
SS Shortest Path (1+1) EA O(n3 log(nwmax)) [Baswana et al., 2009]
MO (1+1) EA O(n3) [Scharnow et al., 2002]
MST (1+1) EA Θ(m2 log(nwmax)) [Neumann and Wegener, 2007]
(1+λ) EA O(nλ log(nwmax)), λ = m2n [Neumann and Wegener, 2007]1-ANT O(mn log(nwmax)) [Neumann and Witt, 2008]
Max. Clique (1+1) EA Θ(n5) [Storch, 2006]
(rand. planar) (16n+1) RLS Θ(n5/3) [Storch, 2006]
Eulerian Cycle (1+1) EA Θ(m2 logm) [Doerr et al., 2007]
MinCut ACO with h = O(1) O(n2(h/)) [Kötzing et al., 2010]
Partition (1+1) EA PRAS, avg. [Witt, 2005]
Vertex Cover (1+1) EA eΩ(n), arb. bad approx. [Friedrich et al., 2007] and
[Oliveto et al., 2007]Set Cover (1+1) EA eΩ(n), arb. bad approx. [Friedrich et al., 2007]
SEMO Pol. O(log n)-approx. [Friedrich et al., 2007]
MaxLeafST (1+1) EA mΩ(k) [Kratsch et al., 2011]
(k leaves) (1+1) EA edge-exch. O(215k2 log k)
Intersection of (1+1) EA 1/p-approximation in [Reichel and Skutella, 2008]
p ≥ 3 matroids O(|E|p+2 log(|E|wmax))
UIO/FSM conf. (1+1) EA eΩ(n) [Lehre and Yao, 2007]
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
15/53
What about population-based EAs?
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
16/53
What about population-based EAs?
“ G i v e n t he mat he mat i c al d i ffi c ul t y o f
t he i nfi ni t e p o p ul at i o n s i z e mo d e l , w e
d o ub t t hat a mat he mat i c al anal y s i s o f fi ni t e p o p ul at i o ns w i l l
b e p o s s i b l e .”
[ M ̈ uhl e nb e i n, 19 9 7 ]
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
17/53
Exploration vs Exploitation...
Selection
Variation
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
18/53
Exploration vs Exploitation...
E l i E l i i
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
19/53
Exploration vs Exploitation...
E l i Al i h f ( )
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
20/53
Evolutionary Algorithm maxx∈{0,1}n f (x)
P tx
for t = 0, 1, 2, . . . until termination condition dofor i = 1 to λ do
Sample i-th parent x according to psel(P t, f )Sample i-th offspring P t+1(i) according to pmut(x)
end forend for
S l ti d V i ti
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
21/53
Selection and Variation
H l t t i k?
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
22/53
How large tournament size k?
k = 1 No selective pressure
Unbiased random walk
Efficient optimisation is impossible
k = λ Highest selective pressure
Only fittest individual reproduced
No population diversity
Ho la ge to a e t si e k?
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
23/53
How large tournament size k?
p0 2n
k
1
7
exp
poly
Runtime
Example
The runtime T of a non-elitist EA with tournament size k
bit-wise mutation rate p
population size λ > log(nr)
on any unimodal function with n Boolean variables
r distinct function values
has expected value
E [T ] =
eΩ(n) if k < e pn
O(λ2r + nr) if k > e pn
Lehre (PPSN’10), Lehre (GECCO’11)
How large tournament size k?
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
24/53
How large tournament size k?
p0 2n
k
1
7
exp
poly
Runtime
Example
The runtime T of a non-elitist EA with tournament size k
bit-wise mutation rate p
population size λ > log(nr)
on any unimodal function with n Boolean variables
r distinct function values
has expected value
E [T ] =
eΩ(n) if k < e pn
O(λ2r + nr) if k > e pn
Lehre (PPSN’10), Lehre (GECCO’11)
k > e p n
How close to the global optimum in polynomial time?
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
25/53
How close to the global optimum in polynomial time?
Theorem ([Lehre, 2011b])
W.o.p., the Hamming-distance from any individual in the first ecngenerations to the global optimum is at least
n
1
2 −
ln k
4 pn 2 −
ln k
pn
.
Other Example Applications
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
26/53
Other Example Applications
Expected runtime of EA with bit-wise mutation rate χ/n
Selection Mechanism High Selective Pressure
Fitness Proportionate ν > f max ln(2eχ)
Linear Ranking η > eχ
k-Tournament k > eχ(µ, λ) λ > µeχ
Cellular EAs
OneMax O(nλ2)
LeadingOnes O(nλ2 + n2)
Linear Functions O(nλ2 + n2)r-Unimodal O(rλ2 + nr)
Jumpr O(nλ2 + (n/χ)r)
Other Example Applications
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
27/53
Other Example Applications
Expected runtime of EA with bit-wise mutation rate χ/n
Selection Mechanism High Selective Pressure Low Selective Pressure
Fitness Proportionate ν > f max ln(2eχ) ν < χ/ ln 2 and λ ≥ n3
Linear Ranking η > eχ η < eχ
k-Tournament k > eχ k < eχ(µ, λ) λ > µeχ λ < µeχ
Cellular EAs ∆(G) < eχ
OneMax O(nλ2) eΩ(n)
LeadingOnes O(nλ2 + n2) eΩ(n)
Linear Functions O(nλ2 + n2) eΩ(n)
r-Unimodal O(rλ2 + nr) eΩ(n)
Jumpr O(nλ2 + (n/χ)r) eΩ(n)
Markov Chain Analysis often Difficult
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
28/53
Markov Chain Analysis often Difficult
Drift Analysis: Long-term behaviour of X from ∆
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
29/53
Drift Analysis: Long term behaviour of X from ∆
Theorem (Positive drift)
If exists δ > 0 st for all t ≥ 0
E [∆t | 0 < g(X t)] ≥ δ
...
then E [T ] ≤ smax/δ .
Theorem (Negative drift)
If exists δ > 0 st for all t ≥ 0
E [∆t | 0 < g(X t) < s] ≤ −δ
...
then E [T ] ≥ ecs
[Hajek, 1982, Oliveto and Witt, 2010, He and Yao, 2001]
State Aggregation Problem
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
30/53
State Aggregation Problem
How to come up with an appropriate distance function g?
Should reflect the progress of the heuristic, given its state.
Often hard to find for single-individual heuristics.
Highly non-trivial to find for population-based heuristics.
A new Approach for Finite Populations
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
31/53
A new Approach for Finite Populations
Fitness Levels (upper bounds)
Concentration of measure
Drift analysis
A new Approach for Finite Populations
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
32/53
A new Approach for Finite Populations
Fitness Levels (upper bounds)
Concentration of measure
Drift analysis
Population Drift (lower bounds)
Branching processes
Drift analysis
Population Drift
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
33/53
p
Central Parameters Reproductive rate
α0 = max1≤ j≤λ
E [#offspring from parent j],
Drift of variation operator
X t+1∼ pmut(X t)
∆mut= g(X t) − g(X t+1)
Population Drift
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
34/53
p
Central Parameters Reproductive rate
α0 = max1≤ j≤λ
E [#offspring from parent j],
Drift of variation operator
X t+1∼ pmut(X t)
∆mut= g(X t) − g(X t+1)
Population Drift
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
35/53
p
Central Parameters Reproductive rate
α0 = max1≤ j≤λ
E [#offspring from parent j],
Drift of variation operator
X t+1∼ pmut(X t)
∆mut= g(X t) − g(X t+1)
Population Drift
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
36/53
p
Central Parameters Reproductive rate
α0 = max1≤ j≤λ
E [#offspring from parent j],
Drift of variation operator
X t+1∼ pmut(X t)
∆mut= g(X t) − g(X t+1)
Population Drift:1 Decoupling Selection & Variation
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
37/53
Population drift [Lehre, 2011b]
If there exists a κ > 0 such that
M ∆mut (κ) < 1/α0
where
∆mut= g(X t) − g(X t+1)
X t+1∼ pmut(X t)
and
α0 = maxj E [#offspring from parent j],
then the runtime is exponential.
1This slide only shows the main conditions of the theorems.
Population Drift:1 Decoupling Selection & Variation
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
38/53
Population drift [Lehre, 2011b]
If there exists a κ > 0 such that
M ∆mut (κ) < 1/α0
where
∆mut= g(X t) − g(X t+1)
X t+1∼ pmut(X t)
and
α0 = maxj E [#offspring from parent j],
then the runtime is exponential.
Classical drift [Hajek, 1982]
If there exists a κ > 0 such that
M ∆(κ) < 1
where
∆ = h(P t) − h(P t+1),
then the runtime is exponential.
1This slide only shows the main conditions of the theorems.
Population Drift - Implications
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
39/53
M ∆mut (κ) < 1
α0=⇒ Inefficient algorithm
High negative drift induced by the variation operator,must be compensated with high reproductive rate.
Analysis of algorithm can be decoupled into analyses of the drift of the variation operator ∆mut the reproductive rate of the selection mechanism α0
Feasible to analyse highly complex processes!
Proof Idea
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
40/53
Population drift as a multi-type branching process.
The Perron root of the mean matrix satisfies
∀κ
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
41/53
Heuristics
RuntimeAnalysis
PerformanceGuarantees
Explicit ProblemStructure
HeuristicUnderstanding
Directions for Further Work
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
42/53
Heuristics
IndustrialProblems
ProblemCharacterisation
RuntimeAnalysis
PerformanceGuarantees
ProblemInsight
HeuristicUnderstanding
DesignGuidelines
Combine Runtime Analysis with Fitness Landscape Theory “Heuristic Understanding” cluster
“Systems to Build Systems” cluster
Conclusion
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
43/53
Strong empirical evidence for the benefit of meta-heuristics Recently, it has become possible to prove mathematical
statements that describe the relationship between
a) Problem characteristics & Parameters of the meta-heuristicb) The expected runtime of the meta-heuristic
Progress made possible by appropriate analytical tools Population drift theorem
Questions?
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
44/53
References I
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
45/53
Baswana, S., Biswas, S., Doerr, B., Friedrich, T., Kurur, P. P., and Neumann, F.(2009).
Computing single source shortest paths using single-objective fitness.In FOGA 09: Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGEVO workshop on Foundations of genetic algorithms , pages 59–66, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
Doerr, B., Klein, C., and Storch, T. (2007).Faster evolutionary algorithms by superior graph representation.In Proceedings of the 1st IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computational Intelligence (FOCI 2007), pages 245–250.
Droste, S. (2006).A rigorous analysis of the compact genetic algorithm for linear functions.Natural Computing , 5(3):257–283.
Droste, S., Jansen, T., and Wegener, I. (2002).On the analysis of the (1+1) Evolutionary Algorithm.
Theoretical Computer Science , 276:51–81.
Droste, S., Jansen, T., and Wegener, I. (2006).Upper and lower bounds for randomized search heuristics in black-boxoptimization.Theory of Computing Systems , 39(4):525–544.
References II
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
46/53
Dubhashi, D. and Panconesi, A. (2009).Concentration of Measure for the Analysis of Randomized Algorithms .Cambridge University Press.
Friedrich, T., Hebbinghaus, N., Neumann, F., He, J., and Witt, C. (2007).Approximating covering problems by randomized search heuristics usingmulti-objective models.In Proceedings of the 9th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation (GECCO 2007), pages 797–804, New York, NY, USA. ACM Press.
Giel, O. and Wegener, I. (2003).Evolutionary algorithms and the maximum matching problem.In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2003), pages 415–426.
Hajek, B. (1982).Hitting-time and occupation-time bounds implied by drift analysis with
applications.Advances in Applied Probability , 14(3):502–525.
He, J. and Yao, X. (2001).Drift analysis and average time complexity of evolutionary algorithms.Artificial Intelligence , 127(1):57–85.
References III
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
47/53
He, J. and Yao, X. (2003).Towards an analytic framework for analysing the computation time of evolutionary algorithms.
Artificial Intelligence , 145(1-2):59–97.
Jansen, T., Jong, K. A. D., and Wegener, I. (2005).On the choice of the offspring population size in evolutionary algorithms.Evolutionary Computation, 13(4):413–440.
Kötzing, T., Lehre, P. K., Neumann, F., and Oliveto, P. S. (2010).
Ant colony optimization and the minimum cut problem.In Proceedings of the 12th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation (GECCO 2010), pages 1393–1400, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
Kratsch, S., Lehre, P. K., Neumann, F., and Oliveto, P. S. (2011).Fixed parameter evolutionary algorithms and maximum leaf spanning trees: Amatter of mutations.
In Proceedings of Parallel Problem Solving from Nature - (PPSN XI), volume6238 of LNCS , pages 204–213. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.
Lehre, P. K. (2011a).Fitness-levels for non-elitist populations.To appear in Proceedings of 2011 Genetic and Evolutionary ComputationConference (GECCO 2011).
References IV
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
48/53
Lehre, P. K. (2011b).Negative drift in populations.In Proceedings of Parallel Problem Solving from Nature - (PPSN XI), volume
6238 of LNCS , pages 244–253. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.Lehre, P. K. and Haddow, P. C. (2006).Accessibility and runtime between convex neutral networks.In Wang, T.-D., Li, X., Chen, S.-H., Wang, X., Abbass, H. A., Iba, H., Chen, G.,and Yao, X., editors, SEAL, volume 4247 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science ,pages 734–741. Springer.
Lehre, P. K. and Yao, X. (2007).Runtime analysis of (1+1) EA on computing unique input output sequences.In Proceedings of 2007 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation(CEC 2007), pages 1882–1889. IEEE Press.
Lehre, P. K. and Yao, X. (2009).On the impact of the mutation-selection balance on the runtime of evolutionary
algorithms.In Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGEVO workshop on Foundations of genetic algorithms (FOGA 2009), pages 47–58, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
Motwani, R. and Raghavan, P. (1995).Randomized Algorithms .Cambridge University Press.
References V
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
49/53
Mühlenbein, H. (1992).How genetic algorithms really work I. Mutation and Hillclimbing.
In Proceedings of the Parallel Problem Solving from Nature 2, (PPSN-II), pages15–26. Elsevier.
Mühlenbein, H. (1997).The equation for response to selection and its use for prediction.Evoluationary Computation, 5(3):303–346.
Neumann, F. and Wegener, I. (2007).
Randomized local search, evolutionary algorithms, and the minimum spanningtree problem.Theoretical Computer Science , 378(1):32–40.
Neumann, F. and Witt, C. (2006).Runtime analysis of a simple ant colony optimization algorithm.In Proceedings of The 17th International Symposium on Algorithms and
Computation (ISAAC 2006), number 4288 in LNCS, pages 618–627.
Neumann, F. and Witt, C. (2008).Ant colony optimization and the minimum spanning tree problem.In Proceedings of Learning and Intelligent Optimization (LION 2008), pages153–166.
References VI
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
50/53
Oliveto, P. and Witt, C. (2010).Simplified drift analysis for proving lower bounds inevolutionary computation.Algorithmica, pages 1–18.10.1007/s00453-010-9387-z.
Oliveto, P. S., He, J., and Yao, X. (2007).Evolutionary algorithms and the vertex cover problem.In In Proceedings of the IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation(CEC 2007).
Reichel, J. and Skutella, M. (2008).Evolutionary algorithms and matroid optimization problems.Algorithmica.
Scharnow, J., Tinnefeld, K., and Wegener, I. (2002).Fitness landscapes based on sorting and shortest paths problems.In Proceedings of 7th Conf. on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature
(PPSN–VII), number 2439 in LNCS, pages 54–63.
Storch, T. (2006).How randomized search heuristics find maximum cliques in planar graphs.In Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation (GECCO 2006), pages 567–574, New York, NY, USA. ACM Press.
References VII
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
51/53
Wegener, I. and Witt, C. (2005).On the analysis of a simple evolutionary algorithm on quadratic pseudo-booleanfunctions.Journal of Discrete Algorithms , 3(1):61–78.
Witt, C. (2005).Worst-case and average-case approximations by simple randomized searchheuristics.In In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 05), number 3404 in LNCS, pages 44–56.
Witt, C. (2006).Runtime Analysis of the (µ + 1) EA on Simple Pseudo-Boolean Functions.Evolutionary Computation, 14(1):65–86.
Zarges, C. (2009).
On the utility of the population size for inversely fitness proportional mutationrates.In FOGA 09: Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGEVO workshop on Foundations of genetic algorithms , pages 39–46, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
Drift Analysis - Upper bounds
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
52/53
0 B
g(X t+1
) g(X t)
∆
Theorem ([He and Yao, 2001])
Given a stochastic process X t≥0 ∈ Ω and g : Ω → R+0 .Define T to be the first time t such that g(X t) = 0.If there exists a constant D > 0 such that ∀t ≥ 0
1. Pr [g(X t) < B] = 1, and
2. E
[g(X t) − g(X t+1) | T > t] ≥ D,then
E [T ] ≤ B
D.
Negative Drift for Populations
Theorem ([Lehre 2011b])
8/16/2019 Pkl Seminar
53/53
Theorem ([Lehre, 2011b])Given the Population Selection-Variation Algorithm with
transition matrix pmut over search space Ω and distance function g : Ω → N+
runtime T := min{t ≥ 0 | g(P 0) ≥ b and g(P t) < a}, b − a = Ω(n)
if there exists a κ > 0, and constants α0, δ1, δ2 > 0, st for all t ≥ 0,
1. E [Rt(i) | a < g(P t(i)) < b] ≤ α0 for all i, 1 ≤ i ≤ λ,
2. E
e−κ∆t(i) | a < g(X t) < b
< 1
α0(1 +
δ1)
3. E
e−κ(g(Xt+1)−b) | g(X t) ≥ b
= O(1)
4. ∀ 1 ≤ + k ≤ j, Pr[∆t(i) = − ∧ ∆t+1(i − ) = −k]
Pr[∆t(i) = − − k] ≤ eκ(b−a)(1−δ2)
5. ∀ 1 ≤ + k ≤ j, Pr[∆t(i) = − j]
Pr[∆t(i − k) = −]
= O(1)
where
Rt(i) := λ
j=1[I t( j) = i] is the number of offspring from individual i
X t≥0 is the Markov process on Ω associated with pmut , and
∆t(i) := (g(X t+1) − g(X t) | g(X t) = i),
then the runtime satisfies Pr [T ≤ ecn] = e−Ω(n), for some constant c > 0.