惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

WordPress大学
WordPress大学
The Cloudflare Blog
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
小众软件
小众软件
V
Visual Studio Blog
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
博客园 - 司徒正美
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
月光博客
月光博客
The GitHub Blog
The GitHub Blog
L
LangChain Blog
D
DataBreaches.Net
T
The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
F
Fortinet All Blogs
博客园 - Franky
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
GbyAI
GbyAI
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
V
V2EX
MyScale Blog
MyScale Blog

cs.NE updates on arXiv.org

MPCS: Neuroplastic Continual Learning via Multi-Component Plasticity and Topology-Aware EWC Combining Trained Models in Reinforcement Learning Training Non-Differentiable Networks via Optimal Transport ShiftLIF: Efficient Multi-Level Spiking Neurons with Power-of-Two Quantization Probe-Geometry Alignment: Erasing the Cross-Sequence Memorization Signature Below Chance Benchmarking local Hebbian learning rules for memory storage and prototype extraction Robust volatility updates for Hierarchical Gaussian Filtering Spiking Sequence Machines and Transformers Affinity Is Not Enough: Recovering the Free Energy Principle in Mixture-of-Experts Scalable Learning in Structured Recurrent Spiking Neural Networks without Backpropagation Geometric and dynamical analysis of attractor boundaries and storage limits in kernel Hopfield networks Attractor FCM Physical Foundation Models: Fixed hardware implementations of large-scale neural networks When Does Structure Matter in Continual Learning? Dimensionality Controls When Modularity Shapes Representational Geometry Learning to Forget: Continual Learning with Adaptive Weight Decay Causal Learning with Neural Assemblies NORACL: Neurogenesis for Oracle-free Resource-Adaptive Continual Learning Text-Utilization for Encoder-dominated Speech Recognition Models EdgeSpike: Spiking Neural Networks for Low-Power Autonomous Sensing in Edge IoT Architectures EvoTSC: Evolving Feature Learning Models for Time Series Classification via Genetic Programming Analysis and Explainability of LLMs Via Evolutionary Methods Deployment-Aligned Low-Precision Neural Architecture Search for Spaceborne Edge AI SeaEvo: Advancing Algorithm Discovery with Strategy Space Evolution Primitive Recursion without Composition: Dynamical Characterizations, from Neural Networks to Polynomial ODEs MAEO: Multiobjective Animorphic Ensemble Optimization for Scalable Large-scale Engineering Applications Necessary and sufficient conditions for universality of Kolmogorov-Arnold networks Learn&Drop: Fast Learning of CNNs based on Layer Dropping Architecture-Induced Recoverability Bias in Differentiable Symbolic Regression Collocation-based Robust Physics Informed Neural Networks for time-dependent simulations of pollution propagation under thermal inversion conditions on Spitsbergen Structure-Guided Diffusion Model for EEG-Based Visual Cognition Reconstruction
The Interactive Effects of Operators and Parameters to GA...
Jaderick P. Pabico, Elizer A. Albacea · 2015-08-01 · via cs.NE updates on arXiv.org

The complex effect of genetic algorithm's (GA) operators and parameters to its performance has been studied extensively by researchers in the past but none studied their interactive effects while the GA is under different problem sizes. In this paper, We present the use of experimental model (1)~to investigate whether the genetic operators and their parameters interact to affect the offline performance of GA, (2)~to find what combination of genetic operators and parameter settings will provide the optimum performance for GA, and (3)~to investigate whether these operator-parameter combination is dependent on the problem size. We designed a GA to optimize a family of traveling salesman problems (TSP), with their optimal solutions known for convenient benchmarking. Our GA was set to use different algorithms in simulating selection ($Ω_s$), different algorithms ($Ω_c$) and parameters ($p_c$) in simulating crossover, and different parameters ($p_m$) in simulating mutation. We used several $n$-city TSPs ($n=\{5, 7, 10, 100, 1000\}$) to represent the different problem sizes (i.e., size of the resulting search space as represented by GA schemata). Using analysis of variance of 3-factor factorial experiments, we found out that GA performance is affected by $Ω_s$ at small problem size (5-city TSP) where the algorithm Partially Matched Crossover significantly outperforms Cycle Crossover at $95\%$ confidence level.