skip to main content
10.1145/2576768.2598264acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Kaizen programming

Published:12 July 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper presents Kaizen Programming, an evolutionary tool based on the concepts of Continuous Improvement from Kaizen Japanese methodology. One may see Kaizen Programming as a new paradigm since, as opposed to classical evolutionary algorithms where individuals are complete solutions, in Kaizen Programming each expert proposes an idea to solve part of the problem, thus a solution is composed of all ideas together. Consequently, evolution becomes a collaborative approach instead of an egocentric one. An idea's quality (analog to an individual's fitness) is not how good it fits the data, but a measurement of its contribution to the solution, which improves the knowledge about the problem. Differently from evolutionary algorithms that simply perform trial-and-error search, one can determine, exactly, parts of the solution that should be removed or improved. That property results in the reduction in bloat, number of function evaluations, and computing time. Even more important, the Kaizen Programming tool, proposed to solve symbolic regression problems, builds the solutions as linear regression models - not linear in the variables, but linear in the parameters, thus all properties and characteristics of such statistical tool are valid. Experiments on benchmark functions proposed in the literature show that Kaizen Programming easily outperforms Genetic Programming and other methods, providing high quality solutions for both training and testing sets while requiring a small number of function evaluations.

References

  1. F.-A. Fortin, F.-M. De Rainville, M.-A. Gardner, M. Parizeau, and C. Gagné. DEAP: Evolutionary algorithms made easy. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 13:2171--2175, jul 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. H. Gitlow, S. Gitlow, A. Oppenheim, and R. Oppenheim. Tools and Methods for the Improvement of Quality. Irwin series in quantitative analysis for business. Taylor & Francis, 1989.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. D. E. Goldberg. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. Addison-Wesley, 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. M. Imai. Kaizen (Ky'zen), the key to Japan's competitive success. McGraw-Hill, 1986.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. D. Karaboga, C. Ozturk, N. Karaboga, and B. Gorkemli. Artificial bee colony programming for symbolic regression. Information Sciences, 209(0):1 -- 15, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. M. F. Korns. Abstract expression grammar symbolic regression. In Genetic Programming Theory and Practice VIII, volume 8 of Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, chapter 7, pages 109--128. Springer, Ann Arbor, USA, 20--22 May 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. M. F. Korns. Abstract expression grammar symbolic regression. In Genetic Programming Theory and Practice VIII, volume 8 of Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, pages 109--128. Springer New York, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. J. R. Koza. Genetic programming - on the programming of computers by means of natural selection. Complex adaptive systems. MIT Press, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. McDermott, D. R. White, S. Luke, L. Manzoni, M. Castelli, L. Vanneschi, W. Jaskowski, K. Krawiec, R. Harper, K. A. D. Jong, and U.-M. O'Reilly. Genetic programming needs better benchmarks. In T. Soule and J. H. Moore, editors, GECCO, pages 791--798. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. A. Moraglio, K. Krawiec, and C. G. Johnson. Geometric semantic genetic programming. In C. A. C. Coello, V. Cutello, K. Deb, S. Forrest, G. Nicosia, and M. Pavone, editors, PPSN (1), volume 7491 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 21--31. Springer, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. M. O'Neill, L. Vanneschi, S. Gustafson, and W. Banzhaf. Open issues in genetic programming. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 11(3--4):339--363, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. C. L. Pennachin, M. Looks, and J. A. de Vasconcelos. Robust symbolic regression with affine arithmetic. In GECCO '10: Proceedings of the 12th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation, pages 917--924, Portland, Oregon, USA, 7--11 July 2010. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. R. Poli, W. Langdon, and N. McPhee. A field guide to genetic programming. Lulu Enterprises Uk Ltd, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. K. Veeramachaneni, O. Derby, D. Sherry, and U.-M. O'Reilly. Learning regression ensembles with genetic programming at scale. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, GECCO '13, pages 1117--1124, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  1. Kaizen programming

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

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

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      GECCO '14: Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation
      July 2014
      1478 pages
      ISBN:9781450326629
      DOI:10.1145/2576768

      Copyright © 2014 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 ACM 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]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 12 July 2014

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      GECCO '14 Paper Acceptance Rate180of544submissions,33%Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

      Upcoming Conference

      GECCO '24
      Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
      July 14 - 18, 2024
      Melbourne , VIC , Australia

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader