research-article

Evolving Graphs with Cartesian Genetic Programming with Lexicase Selection

Authors:

Kevin Cortacero,

Sylvain Cussat-BlancAuthors Info & Claims

GECCO '23 Companion: Proceedings of the Companion Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation

Pages 1920 - 1924

https://doi.org/10.1145/3583133.3596402

Published: 24 July 2023 Publication History

Abstract

The automatic construction of an image filter is a difficult task for which many recent machine-learning methods have been proposed. Cartesian Genetic Programming (CGP) has been effectively used in image-processing tasks by evolving programs with a function set specialized for computer vision. Although standard CGP is able to construct understandable image filter programs, we hypothesize that explicitly using a mechanism to control the size of the generated filter programs would help reduce the size of the final solution while keeping comparable efficacy on a given task. It is indeed central to keep the graph size as contained as possible as it improves our ability to understand them and explain their inner functioning. In this work, we use the Lexicase selection as the mechanism to control the size of the programs during the evolutionary process, by allowing CGP to evolve solutions based on performance and on the size of such solutions. We extend Kartezio, a Cartesian Genetic Programming for computer vision tasks, to generate our programs. We found in our preliminary experiment that CGP with Lexicase selection is able to achieve similar performance to the standard CGP while keeping the size of the solutions smaller.

References

[1]

Arbab Masood Ahmad, Gul Muhammad Khan, Sahibzada Ali Mahmud, and Julian Francis Miller. 2012. Breast Cancer Detection Using Cartesian Genetic Programming Evolved Artificial Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA) (GECCO '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1031--1038.

Digital Library

[2]

Julien Biau, Dennis Wilson, Sylvain Cussat-Blanc, and Hervé Luga. 2021. Improving Image Filters with Cartesian Genetic Programming. In IJCCI. 17--27.

[3]

Kévin Cortacero, Brienne McKenzie, Sabina Müller, Roxana Khazen, Fanny Lafouresse, Gaëlle Corsaut, Nathalie Van Acker, François-Xavier Frenois, Laurence Lamant, Nicolas Meyer, Béatrice Vergier, Dennis G. Wilson, Hervé Luga, Oskar Staufer, Michael L. Dustin, Salvatore Valitutti, and Sylvain Cussat-Blanc. 2023. Kartezio: Evolutionary Design of Explainable Pipelines for Biomedical Image Analysis. arXiv:2302.14762 [cs.CV]

[4]

Allan de Lima, Samuel Carvalho, Douglas Mota Dias, Enrique Naredo, Joseph P. Sullivan, and Conor Ryan. 2022. Lexi2: Lexicase Selection with Lexicographic Parsimony Pressure. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Boston, Massachusetts) (GECCO '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 929--937.

Digital Library

[5]

Simon Harding, Jürgen Leitner, and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 2013. Cartesian Genetic Programming for Image Processing. Springer New York, New York, NY, 31--44.

[6]

Yifan He, Claus Aranha, Antony Hallam, and Romain Chassagne. 2022. Optimization of subsurface models with multiple criteria using Lexicase Selection. Operations Research Perspectives 9 (2022), 100237.

[7]

Thomas Helmuth and Lee Spector. 2013. Evolving a Digital Multiplier with the Pushgp Genetic Programming System. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference Companion on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) (GECCO '13 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1627--1634.

Digital Library

[8]

Thomas Helmuth, Lee Spector, and James Matheson. 2015. Solving Uncompromising Problems With Lexicase Selection. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 19, 5 (2015), 630--643.

Digital Library

[9]

Roman Kalkreuth, Günter Rudolph, and Jorg Krone. 2016. More efficient evolution of small genetic programs in Cartesian Genetic Programming by using genotypie age. In 2016 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC). 5052--5059.

Digital Library

[10]

William La Cava, Lee Spector, and Kourosh Danai. 2016. Epsilon-Lexicase Selection for Regression. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference 2016 (Denver, Colorado, USA) (GECCO '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 741--748.

Digital Library

[11]

Julian F. Miller. 1999. An Empirical Study of the Efficiency of Learning Boolean Functions Using a Cartesian Genetic Programming Approach. In Proceedings of the 1st Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation - Volume 2 (Orlando, Florida) (GECCO'99). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 1135--1142.

[12]

Hamid Rezatofighi, Nathan Tsoi, JunYoung Gwak, Amir Sadeghian, Ian Reid, and Silvio Savarese. 2019. Generalized Intersection Over Union: A Metric and a Loss for Bounding Box Regression. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[13]

Cynthia Rudin. 2019. Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nature machine intelligence 1, 5 (2019), 206--215.

[14]

Lee Spector. 2012. Assessment of Problem Modality by Differential Performance of Lexicase Selection in Genetic Programming: A Preliminary Report. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference Companion on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA) (GECCO '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 401--408.

Digital Library

[15]

Masanori Suganuma, Shinichi Shirakawa, and Tomoharu Nagao. 2020. Designing Convolutional Neural Network Architectures Using Cartesian Genetic Programming. Springer Singapore, Singapore, 185--208.

[16]

Andrew James Turner and Julian Francis Miller. 2014. Cartesian Genetic Programming: Why No Bloat?. In Genetic Programming, Miguel Nicolau, Krzysztof Krawiec, Malcolm I. Heywood, Mauro Castelli, Pablo García-Sánchez, Juan J. Merelo, Victor M. Rivas Santos, and Kevin Sim (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 222--233.

[17]

Dennis G Wilson, Sylvain Cussat-Blanc, Hervé Luga, and Julian F Miller. 2018. Evolving Simple Programs for Playing Atari Games. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Kyoto, Japan) (GECCO '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 229--236.

Digital Library

Cited By

De La Torre CCussat-Blanc SWilson DLavinas YLi XHandl J(2024)On Search Trajectory Networks for Graph Genetic ProgrammingProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion10.1145/3638530.3664169(1681-1685)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3638530.3664169
Lavinas YHaut NPunch WBanzhaf WCussat-Blanc SLi XHandl J(2024)Dynamically Sampling biomedical Images For Genetic ProgrammingProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion10.1145/3638530.3654202(515-518)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3638530.3654202
Lavinas YHaut NPunch WBanzhaf WCussat-Blanc S(2024)Data Sampling via Active Learning in Cartesian Genetic Programming for Biomedical Data2024 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC)10.1109/CEC60901.2024.10611879(1-8)Online publication date: 30-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC60901.2024.10611879
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Evolving Graphs with Cartesian Genetic Programming with Lexicase Selection
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Machine learning
    1. Machine learning approaches
      1. Bio-inspired approaches

Recommendations

A new crossover technique for Cartesian genetic programming
GECCO '07: Proceedings of the 9th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation

Genetic Programming was first introduced by Koza using tree representation together with a crossover technique in which random sub-branches of the parents' trees are swapped to create the offspring. Later Miller and Thomson introduced Cartesian Genetic ...
A comparison of Cartesian genetic programming and linear genetic programming
EuroGP'08: Proceedings of the 11th European conference on Genetic programming

Two prominent genetic programming approaches are the graph-based Cartesian Genetic Programming (CGP) and Linear Genetic Programming (LGP). Recently, a formal algorithm for constructing a directed acyclic graph (DAG) from a classical LGP instruction ...
Solving real-valued optimisation problems using cartesian genetic programming
GECCO '07: Proceedings of the 9th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation

Classical Evolutionary Programming (CEP) and Fast Evolutionary Programming (FEP) have been applied to real-valued function optimisation. Both of these techniques directly evolve the real-values that are the arguments of the real-valued function. In this ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

GECCO '23 Companion: Proceedings of the Companion Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation

July 2023

2519 pages

ISBN:9798400701207

DOI:10.1145/3583133

Chair:
Sara Silva,
Program Chair:
Luís Paquete

Copyright © 2023 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGEVO: ACM Special Interest Group on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 24 July 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Investing for the Future ? PIA3
Laboratoire d?Excellence Toulouse Cancer TOUCAN

Conference

GECCO '23 Companion

Sponsor:

SIGEVO

GECCO '23 Companion: Companion Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation

July 15 - 19, 2023

Lisbon, Portugal

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,669 of 4,410 submissions, 38%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

4
Total Citations
View Citations
51
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)26
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 27 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

De La Torre CCussat-Blanc SWilson DLavinas YLi XHandl J(2024)On Search Trajectory Networks for Graph Genetic ProgrammingProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion10.1145/3638530.3664169(1681-1685)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3638530.3664169
Lavinas YHaut NPunch WBanzhaf WCussat-Blanc SLi XHandl J(2024)Dynamically Sampling biomedical Images For Genetic ProgrammingProceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion10.1145/3638530.3654202(515-518)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3638530.3654202
Lavinas YHaut NPunch WBanzhaf WCussat-Blanc S(2024)Data Sampling via Active Learning in Cartesian Genetic Programming for Biomedical Data2024 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC)10.1109/CEC60901.2024.10611879(1-8)Online publication date: 30-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC60901.2024.10611879
Lavinas YHaut NPunch WBanzhaf WCussat-Blanc S(2024)Adaptive Sampling of Biomedical Images with Cartesian Genetic ProgrammingParallel Problem Solving from Nature – PPSN XVIII10.1007/978-3-031-70055-2_16(256-272)Online publication date: 14-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-70055-2_16

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents