A computer program capable of acting intelligently in the world must have a general representation of the world in terms of which its inputs are interpreted. Designing such a program requires commitments about what knowledge

Clustering is the unsupervised classification of patterns (observations, data items, or feature vectors) into groups (clusters). The clustering problem has been addressed in many contexts and by researchers in many disciplines; this reflects its broad appeal and usefulness as one of the steps in exploratory data analysis. However, clustering is a difficult problem combinatorially, and differences in assumptions and contexts in different communities has made the transfer of useful generic concepts and methodologies slow to occur. This paper presents an overview of pattern clustering methods from a statistical pattern recognition perspective, with a goal of providing useful advice and references to fundamental concepts accessible to the broad community of clustering practitioners. We present a taxonomy of clustering techniques, and identify cross-cutting themes and recent advances. We also describe some important applications of clustering algorithms such as image segmentation, object recognition, and information retrieval.

A framework is developed to explore the connection between effective optimization algorithms and the problems they are solving. A number of “no free lunch ” (NFL) theorems are presented which establish that for any algorithm, any elevated performance over one class of problems is offset by performance over another class. These theorems result in a geometric interpretation of what it means for an algorithm to be well suited to an optimization problem. Applications of the NFL theorems to information-theoretic aspects of optimization and benchmark measures of performance are also presented. Other issues addressed include time-varying optimization problems and a priori “head-to-head” minimax distinctions between optimization algorithms, distinctions that result despite the NFL theorems’ enforcing of a type of uniformity over all algorithms.

This paper: 1) reviews different combinations between ANN's and evolutionary algorithms (EA's), including using EA's to evolve ANN connection weights, architectures, learning rules, and input features; 2) discusses different search operators which have been used in various EA's; and 3) points out possible future research directions. It is shown, through a considerably large literature review, that combinations between ANN's and EA's can lead to significantly better intelligent systems than relying on ANN's or EA's alone

Evolutionary computation is becoming common in the solution of difficult, realworld problems in industry, medicine, and defense. This paper reviews some of the practical advantages to using evolutionary algorithms as compared with classic methods of optimization or artificial intelligence. Specific advantages include the flexibility of the procedures, as well as the ability to self-adapt the search for optimum solutions on the fly. As desktop computers increase in speed, the application of evolutionary algorithms will become routine. 1 Introduction Darwinian evolution is intrinsically a robust search and optimization mechanism. Evolved biota demonstrate optimized complex behavior at every level: the cell, the organ, the individual, and the population. The problems that biological species have solved are typified by chaos, chance, temporality, and nonlinear interactivities. These are also characteristics of problems that have proved to be especially intractable to classic methods of o...

This tutorial covers the canonical genetic algorithm as well as more experimental forms of genetic algorithms, including parallel island models and parallel cellular genetic algorithms. The tutorial also illustrates genetic search byhyperplane sampling. The theoretical foundations of genetic algorithms are reviewed, include the schema theorem as well as recently developed exact models of the canonical genetic algorithm.

Standard methods for inducing both the structure and weight values of recurrent neural networks fit an assumed class of architectures to every task. This simplification is necessary because the interactions between network structure and function are not well understood. Evolutionary computation, which includes genetic algorithms and evolutionary programming, is a population-based search method that has shown promise in such complex tasks. This paper argues that genetic algorithms are inappropriate for network acquisition and describes an evolutionary program, called GNARL, that simultaneously acquires both the structure and weights for recurrent networks. This algorithm's empirical acquisition method allows for the emergence of complex behaviors and topologies that are potentially excluded by the artificial architectural constraints imposed in standard network induction methods. To Appear in: IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks January The Ohio State University January 17, 1996 1 ...

Evolutionary computation has started to receive significant attention during the last decade, although the origins can be traced back to the late 1950s. This article surveys the history as well as the current state of this rapidly growing field. We describe the purpose, the general structure and the working principles of different approaches, including genetic algorithms (GA) (with links to genetic programming (GP) and classifier systems (CS)), evolution strategies (ES), and evolutionary programming (EP), by analysis and comparison of their most important constituents (i.e., representations, variation operators, reproduction and selection mechanism). Finally, we give a brief overview on the manifold of application domains, although this necessarily must remain incomplete.

It is appealing to consider hybrids of neural-network learning algorithms with evolutionary search procedures, simply because Nature has so successfully done so. In fact, computational models of learning and evolution offer theoretical biology new tools for addressing questions about Nature that have dogged that field since Darwin [Belew, 1990]. The concern of this paper, however, is strictly artificial: Can hybrids of connectionist learning algorithms and genetic algorithms produce more efficient and effective algorithms than either technique applied in isolation? The paper begins with a survey of recent work (by us and others) that combines Holland's Genetic Algorithm (GA) with connectionist techniques and delineates some of the basic design problems these hybrids share. This analysis suggests the dangers of overly literal representations of the network on the genome (e.g., encoding each weight explicitly). A preliminary set of experiments that use the GA to find unusual but successf...

Evolutionary programming (EP) has been applied with success to many numerical and combinatorial optimization problems in recent years. EP has rather slow convergence rates, however, on some function optimization problems. In this paper, a "fast EP" (FEP) is proposed which uses a Cauchy instead of Gaussian mutation as the primary search operator. The relationship between FEP and classical EP (CEP) is similar to that between fast simulated annealing and the classical version. Both analytical and empirical studies have been carried out to evaluate the performance of FEP and CEP for different function optimization problems. This paper shows that FEP is very good at search in a large neighborhood while CEP is better at search in a small local neighborhood. For a suite of 23 benchmark problems, FEP performs much better than CEP for multimodal functions with many local minima while being comparable to CEP in performance for unimodal and multimodal functions with only a few local minima. This paper also shows the relationship between the search step size and the probability of finding a global optimum and thus explains why FEP performs better than CEP on some functions but not on others. In addition, the importance of the neighborhood size and its relationship to the probability of finding a near-optimum is investigated. Based on these analyses, an improved FEP (IFEP) is proposed and tested empirically. This technique mixes different search operators (mutations). The experimental results show that IFEP performs better than or as well as the better of FEP and CEP for most benchmark problems tested.