ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Benchmarking a BI-population CMA-ES on the BBOB-2009 function testbed
Full text PdfPdf (760 KB)
Source
Genetic And Evolutionary Computation Conference archive
Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference Companion on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference: Late Breaking Papers table of contents
Montreal, Québec, Canada
WORKSHOP SESSION: Black box optimization benchmarking (BBOB) table of contents
Pages 2389-2396  
Year of Publication: 2009
ISBN:978-1-60558-505-5
Author
Nikolaus Hansen  INRIA Saclay, Orsay, France
Sponsors
SIGEVO: ACM Special Interest Group on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 8,   Downloads (12 Months): 21,   Citation Count: 2
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1570256.1570333
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

We propose a multistart CMA-ES with equal budgets for two interlaced restart strategies, one with an increasing population size and one with varying small population sizes. This BI-population CMA-ES is benchmarked on the BBOB-2009 noiseless function testbed and could solve 23, 22 and 20 functions out of 24 in search space dimensions 10, 20 and 40, respectively, within a budget of less than $10^6 D$ function evaluations per trial.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
A. Auger and N. Hansen. A restart CMA evolution strategy with increasing population size. In Proceedings of the IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2005), pages 1769--1776. IEEE Press, 2005.
 
2
S. Finck, N. Hansen, R. Ros, and A. Auger. Real-parameter black-box optimization benchmarking 2009: Presentation of the noiseless functions. Technical Report 2009/20, Research Center PPE, 2009.
 
3
N. Hansen. The CMA evolution strategy: a comparing review. In J. Lozano, P. Larranaga, I. Inza, and E. Bengoetxea, editors, Towards a new evolutionary computation. Advances on estimation of distribution algorithms, pages 75--102. Springer, 2006.
 
4
N. Hansen, A. Auger, S. Finck, and R. Ros. Real-parameter black-box optimization benchmarking 2009: Experimental setup. Technical Report RR-6828, INRIA, 2009.
 
5
N. Hansen, S. Finck, R. Ros, and A. Auger. Real-parameter black-box optimization benchmarking 2009: Noiseless functions definitions. Technical Report RR-6829, INRIA, 2009.
 
6
N. Hansen and S. Kern. Evaluating the CMA evolution strategy on multimodal test functions. In X. Yao et al., editors, Parallel Problem Solving from Nature -- PPSN VIII, LNCS 3242, pages 282--291. Springer, 2004.
 
7
 
8
N. Hansen, A. Niederberger, L. Guzzella, and P. Koumoutsakos. A method for handling uncertainty in evolutionary optimization with an application to feedback control of combustion. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 13(1):180--197, 2009.
 
9