Upload
carlos-m-fernandes
View
839
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presentation for the paper "Using Self-Organized Criticality for Adjusting the Parameters of a Particle Swarm", International Conference on Evolutionary Computation (ECTA) 2012, Barcelona, Spain
Citation preview
USING SELF-ORGANIZED CRITICALITY FOR ADJUSTING THE
PARAMETERS OF A PARTICLE SWARM
Carlos M. Fernandes1,2
J.J. Merelo1
Agostinho C. Rosa2
1Department of computers architecture and technology, University of Granada, Spain
2 LaSEEB-ISR-IST, Technical Univ. of Lisbon (IST), Portugal
2
Why?
Particle Swarm and Self-Organized Criticality
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
Exploration
Exploitation
3
Parameter Controlin bio-inspired computation
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
Deterministic: parameter values change according to
deterministic rulesAdaptive: variation depends indirectly on the problem and
search stage
Self- adaptive: values evolve together with the solutions to the problem Hand-tuning
SOC
4
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)
Cultural and social interaction: cognitive, social and random factors.
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
Bio-inspired: bird flock and fish school.
5
PSO – equations and parameters
X i(t) =
X i – position of particle i (vector)V i – velocity of particle i (vector)
Vi(t) =
Xi(t-1)+Vi(t)
Vi(t-1)+c1 r1(pi-xi(t-1))+c2
r2(pg-xi(t-1))ω Vi(t-1)+c1 r1(pi-xi(t-1))+c2
r2(pg-xi(t-1))
ρ Xi(t-1)+Xi(t-1)+Vi(t)
c
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain 6
SOC: a state of criticality formed by self-organization in a long transient period at the border of order and chaos.
Self-Organized Criticality (SOC)
The Sandpile Model
7
SOCPower-laws
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
8
[1] BK-inspired Extremal Optimization, Boettcher and
Percus, 2003
[2] Sandpile in Evolutionary Algorithms, Krink et al., 2000-
2001
[3] SOC in PSO, Løvbjerg and Krink, 2004
[4] BK model in Evolutionary Algorithms – Self-Organized
Random Immigrants GA (SORIGA), Tinós and Yang, 2008
[5] Sand Pile Mutation for Genetic Algorithms, Fernandes et
al., 2008-2012
SOC in Bio-inspired Computation
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
9
Bak-Sneppen Model
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
f = 0.14
f = 0.41 f = 0.55
f = 0.79
f = 0.23
f = 0.90
f = 0.91
f = 0.32
f = 0.16
Per Bak (How Nature Works):Random numbers are arranged in a circle. At each time step, the lowest number, and the numbers at its two neighbours, are replaced by new random numbers.
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain 10
BK Model: punctuated equilibrium and power-laws
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain 11
The Bak-Sneppen PSO (BS-PSO)
X i(t) =Vi(t) =
ω Vi(t-1)+c1r1(pi-xi(t-1))+c2r2(pg-xi(t-1))
ρ Xi(t-1)+Xi(t-1)+Vi(t)
ω = 1-bs_fitness(i)
c1 =c2=1+bs_fitness(i)
ρ =random [0, 1-bs_fitness(i)]
12
General Scheme
BS model PSO
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
BS species
Particles
bs_fitness
ω
c
ρ
13
o Sphere, Rastrigin, Rosenbrock, Griewank
o lbest and gbest topologies.
o TVIW-PSO, RANDIW- PSO, GLbestIW-PSO and IA-PSO
o Population size: n = 20
o 3000 generations
Test Set
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
14ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
BS-PSO
bs, 1.49, 0 bs, 2.0, 0 bs, bs, 0 bs, bs, 0.25 bs. bs, bs
f1 3.35e+01(1.90e+02)
1.38e-15(3.21e-15)
8.30e-32(3.47e-31)
0.00e+00(0.00e+00)
0.00e+00(0.00e+00)
f2 1.67e+05(1.17e+06)
1.88e+02(2.53e+02)
8.56e+01(7.98e+01)
2.61e+01(2.66e-01)
2.60e+01(1.58e-01)
f3 2.82e+02(4.44e+01)
1.11e+02(2.75e+01)
2.02e+02(4.16e+01)
4.88e+00(7.73e+00)
3.32e+00(7.09e+00)
f4 1.63e+00(5.93e+00)
1.25e-02(1.26e-02)
1.65e-02(2.24e-02)
3.79e-03(2.29e-03)
4.51e-03(4.00e-03)
(ω, c, ρ)
15
PSO 1 vs. PSO 2 f1 f2 f3 f4
BS-PSO vs TVIW-PSO + + + +BS-PSO vs RANDIW-PSO + + + +BS-PSOvs GLbestIW-PSO + + + +
Results – lbest
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
PSO 1 vs. PSO 2 f1 f2 f3 f4
BS-PSO vs TVIW-PSO + + – –BS-PSO vs RANDIW-PSO + ~ – ~BS-PSO vs GLbestIW-PSO + + ~ +
full control
without perturbation of position
16
Results – lbest
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
PSO 1 vs. PSO 2 f1 f2 f3 f4
BS-PSO vs IA-PSO + + ~ +
BS-PSOvs IA-PSO (bs controled ) ~ ~ + ~
17
Results – gbest
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
PSO 1 vs. PSO 2 f1 f2 f3 f4
BS-PSO vs TVIW-PSO + + + +BS-PSO vs RANDIW-PSO + + + +BS-PSOvs GLbestIW-PSO + + + +
BS-PSO) vs IA-PSO + + ~ +
18
Distribution of parameter values
0 27 54 81 108 135 162 189 216 243 270 297 324 351 378 405 432 459 486 513 540 567 594 621 648 675 702 729 756 783 810 837 864 891 918 945 972 999
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
iterations
0.01 0.1 1
1
10
100
1000
ωi =ρi
num
ber
of
sam
ple
s
19
o With a simple set of equations we are able to control three (four) parameters of the PSO.
o The resulting algorithm is competitive with other variants of the PSO.
o Full control of the PSO by BS attains good performance.
o Hand-tuning is not required.
Conclusions
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
20
o Information (state) from PSO into the model.
o Test BS-PSO on dynamic environments.
o Scalability.
o BS critical state: investigate the behaviour before and after the system reaches the critical state.
Future Research
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain
ECTA 2012, Barcelona, Spain 21
Questions?