Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
TocHeadingTitle
Date
Availability
1-3 of 3
Lee Spector
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Artificial Life (2021) 27 (3–4): 183–203.
Published: 16 March 2022
Abstract
View article
PDF
In genetic programming, an evolutionary method for producing computer programs that solve specified computational problems, parent selection is ordinarily based on aggregate measures of performance across an entire training set. Lexicase selection, by contrast, selects on the basis of performance on random sequences of training cases; this has been shown to enhance problem-solving power in many circumstances. Lexicase selection can also be seen as better reflecting biological evolution, by modeling sequences of challenges that organisms face over their lifetimes. Recent work has demonstrated that the advantages of lexicase selection can be amplified by down-sampling, meaning that only a random subsample of the training cases is used each generation. This can be seen as modeling the fact that individual organisms encounter only subsets of the possible environments and that environments change over time. Here we provide the most extensive benchmarking of down-sampled lexicase selection to date, showing that its benefits hold up to increased scrutiny. The reasons that down-sampling helps, however, are not yet fully understood. Hypotheses include that down-sampling allows for more generations to be processed with the same budget of program evaluations; that the variation of training data across generations acts as a changing environment, encouraging adaptation; or that it reduces overfitting, leading to more general solutions. We systematically evaluate these hypotheses, finding evidence against all three, and instead draw the conclusion that down-sampled lexicase selection's main benefit stems from the fact that it allows the evolutionary process to examine more individuals within the same computational budget, even though each individual is examined less completely.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Artificial Life (2016) 22 (3): 408–423.
Published: 01 August 2016
Abstract
View article
PDF
We describe the content and outcomes of the First Workshop on Open-Ended Evolution: Recent Progress and Future Milestones (OEE1), held during the ECAL 2015 conference at the University of York, UK, in July 2015. We briefly summarize the content of the workshop's talks, and identify the main themes that emerged from the open discussions. Two important conclusions from the discussions are: (1) the idea of pluralism about OEE—it seems clear that there is more than one interesting and important kind of OEE; and (2) the importance of distinguishing observable behavioral hallmarks of systems undergoing OEE from hypothesized underlying mechanisms that explain why a system exhibits those hallmarks. We summarize the different hallmarks and mechanisms discussed during the workshop, and list the specific systems that were highlighted with respect to particular hallmarks and mechanisms. We conclude by identifying some of the most important open research questions about OEE that are apparent in light of the discussions. The York workshop provides a foundation for a follow-up OEE2 workshop taking place at the ALIFE XV conference in Cancún, Mexico, in July 2016. Additional materials from the York workshop, including talk abstracts, presentation slides, and videos of each talk, are available at http://alife.org/ws/oee1 .
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Artificial Life (2006) 12 (4): 553–560.
Published: 01 October 2006
Abstract
View article
PDF
Evolutionary theorists have long been interested in the conditions that permit the evolution of altruistic cooperation. Recent work has demonstrated that altruistic donation can evolve in surprisingly simple models, in which agents base their decisions to donate solely on the similarity of evolved “tags” relative to evolved tag-difference tolerances. There is disagreement, however, about the conditions under which tag-mediated altruism will in fact evolve. Here we vary two critical parameters in a standard model of tag-mediated altruism—genetic stability and territorial structure—and show that altruism evolves in a wide range of conditions. We demonstrate the evolution of significant levels of altruism even when the immediate costs to donors equal the benefits to recipients. We describe the mechanism that permits the emergence of altruism in the model as a form of kin selection that is facilitated by interactions between altruism, genetic drift, and fecundity.