Skip to main content

The Influence of Learning in the Evolution of Busy Beavers

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Applications of Evolutionary Computing (EvoWorkshops 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2037))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The goal of this research is to study how individual learning interacts with an evolutionary algorithm in its search for good candidates for the Busy Beaver problem. Two learning models, designed to act as local search procedures, are proposed. Experimental results show that local search methods that are able to perform several modifications in the structure of an individual in each learning step provide an important advantage. Some insight about the role that evolution and learning play during search is also presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Belew, R. and Mitchell, M. (1996). Adaptive Individuals in Evolving Populations: Models and Algorithms, Santa Fe Institute in the Sciences of Complexity, Vol. XXVI, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pereira, F.B., Machado, P., Costa, E., Cardoso, A., Rodriguez, A. Santana, R., and Soto, M. (2000). Too Busy to Learn. Proceedings of the Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC-2000), pp. 720–727.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sasaki, T. and Tokoro, M. (1999). Adaptation under Changing Environments with Various Rates of Inheritance of Acquired Characters: Comparison Between Darwinian and Lamarckian Evolution. In McKay, B., Yao, X., Newton, C.S., Kim, J.H. and Furuhashi, T. (Eds.), Proceedings of 2 nd Asia-Pacific Conference on Simulated Evolution and Learning (SEAL-98).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Whitley, D., Gordon, S. and Mathias, K. (1994). Lamarckian Evolution, the Baldwin Effect, and Function Optimization. In Davidor, Y. Schwefel, H.P. and Manner, R. (Eds.) Parallel Problem Solving from Nature (PPSN-III), pp. 6–15.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Corne, D, Glover, F. and Dorigo, M. (1999). New Ideas in Optimization. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rado, T. (1962) On non-computable functions, The Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 41,no.3, pp.877–884.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Jones, T. and Rawlins, G. (1993). Reverse Hillclimbing, Genetic Algorithms, and the Busy Beaver Problem. In Forrest, S. (Ed.). Proceedings of the 5 th International Conference on Genetic Algorithms (ICGA-93), pp.70–75, San Mateo, CA, Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Machado, P., Pereira, F.B, Cardoso, A., Costa, E. (1999). Busy Beaver-The Influence of Representation, In Poli, R., Nordin, P. Langdon, W. and Fogarty, T. (Eds.). Proceedings of the Second European Workshop in Genetic Programming (EuroGP-99).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bull, L. (1999). On the Baldwin Effect. Artificial Life, Vol. 5(3), pp. 241–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pereira, F.B. and Costa, E. (1997). The Influence of Learning in the Optimization of Royal Road Functions, Proceedings of the 3 rd International Mendel Conference on Genetic algorithms, Optimization Problems, Fuzzy Logic, Neural Networks and Rough Sets (Mendel’97), pp 244–249.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Boolos, G., and Jeffrey, R. (1995). Computability and Logic, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ackley, D. and Littman, M. (1994). A Case for Lamarckian Evolution. In Langton, C. (Ed.), Artificial Life III, pp. 3–10, Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Imada, A. and Araki, K. (1996). Lamarckian Evolution of Associative Memory. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Evolutionary Computation (ICEC-96), pp.676–680.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Pereira, F.B., Machado, P., Costa, E. and Cardoso A. (1999). Graph Based Crossover-A Case Study with the Busy Beaver Problem. In Banzhaf, W., Daida, J., Eiben, A.E., Garzon, M.H., Honavar, V., Jakiela, M., & Smith, R.E. (Eds.). GECCO-99: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, pp. 1149–1155, Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lally, A., Reineke, J. and Weader, J. (1997). An Abstract Representation of Busy Beaver Candidate Turing Machines, Technical Report, Van Gogh Group, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Pereira, F.B., Costa, E. (2001). The Influence of Learning in the Evolution of Busy Beavers. In: Boers, E.J.W. (eds) Applications of Evolutionary Computing. EvoWorkshops 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2037. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45365-2_44

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45365-2_44

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41920-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45365-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics