Search

Counterexample-driven genetic programming (CDGP) uses specifications provided as formal constraints to generate the training cases used to evaluate evolving programs. It has also been extended to combine formal constraints and user-provided training data to solve symbolic regression problems. Here we show how the ideas underlying CDGP can also be applied using only user-provided training data, without formal specifications. We demonstrate the application of this method, called ``informal CDGP,'' to software synthesis problems. Our results show that informal CDGP finds solutions faster (i.e. with fewer program executions) than standard GP. Additionally, we propose two new variants to informal CDGP, and find that one produces significantly more successful runs on about half of the tested problems. Finally, we study whether the addition of counterexample training cases to the training set is useful by comparing informal CDGP to using a static subsample of the training set, and find that the addition of counterexamples significantly improves performance.

Contemporary genetic programming (GP) systems for general program synthesis have been primarily concerned with evolving programs that can manipulate values from a standard set of primitive data types and simple indexed data structures. In contrast, human programmers do not limit themselves to a small finite set of data types and use polymorphism to express an unbounded number of types including nested data structures, product types, and generic functions. Code-building Genetic Programming (CBGP) is a recently introduced method that compiles type-safe programs from linear genomes using stack-based compilation and a formal type system. Although prior work with CBGP has shown initial demonstrations of polymorphism inside evolved programs, we have provided a deeper exploration of these capabilities through the evolution of programs which make use of generic data types such as key-value maps, tuples, and sets, as well as higher order functions and functions with polymorphic type signatures. In our experiments, CBGP is able to solve problems with all of these properties, where every other GP system that we know of has restrictions that make it unable to even consider problems with these properties. This demonstration provides a significant step towards fully aligning the expressiveness of GP to real world programming., Comment: 9 pages, 5 figures, to be published in proceedings of GECCO 2023

Genetic programming systems often use large training sets to evaluate the quality of candidate solutions for selection, which is often computationally expensive. Down-sampling training sets has long been used to decrease the computational cost of evaluation in a wide range of application domains. More specifically, recent studies have shown that both random and informed down-sampling can substantially improve problem-solving success for GP systems that use the lexicase parent selection algorithm. We test whether these down-sampling techniques can also improve problem-solving success in the context of three other commonly used selection methods, fitness-proportionate, tournament, implicit fitness sharing plus tournament selection, across six program synthesis GP problems. We verified that down-sampling can significantly improve the problem-solving success for all three of these other selection schemes, demonstrating its general efficacy. We discern that the selection pressure imposed by the selection scheme does not interact with the down-sampling method. However, we find that informed down-sampling can improve problem solving success significantly over random down-sampling when the selection scheme has a mechanism for diversity maintenance like lexicase or implicit fitness sharing. Overall, our results suggest that down-sampling should be considered more often when solving test-based problems, regardless of the selection scheme in use., Comment: ALIFE 2024: Proceedings of the 2024 Artificial Life Conference

We present an analysis of the loss of population-level test coverage induced by different down-sampling strategies when combined with lexicase selection. We study recorded populations from the first generation of genetic programming runs, as well as entirely synthetic populations. Our findings verify the hypothesis that informed down-sampling better maintains population-level test coverage when compared to random down-sampling. Additionally, we show that both forms of down-sampling cause greater test coverage loss than standard lexicase selection with no down-sampling. However, given more information about the population, we found that informed down-sampling can further reduce its test coverage loss. We also recommend wider adoption of the static population analyses we present in this work., Comment: Accepted to the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference 2023

Genetic Programming (GP) often uses large training sets and requires all individuals to be evaluated on all training cases during selection. Random down-sampled lexicase selection evaluates individuals on only a random subset of the training cases allowing for more individuals to be explored with the same amount of program executions. However, creating a down-sample randomly might exclude important cases from the current down-sample for a number of generations, while cases that measure the same behavior (synonymous cases) may be overused despite their redundancy. In this work, we introduce Informed Down-Sampled Lexicase Selection. This method leverages population statistics to build down-samples that contain more distinct and therefore informative training cases. Through an empirical investigation across two different GP systems (PushGP and Grammar-Guided GP), we find that informed down-sampling significantly outperforms random down-sampling on a set of contemporary program synthesis benchmark problems. Through an analysis of the created down-samples, we find that important training cases are included in the down-sample consistently across independent evolutionary runs and systems. We hypothesize that this improvement can be attributed to the ability of Informed Down-Sampled Lexicase Selection to maintain more specialist individuals over the course of evolution, while also benefiting from reduced per-evaluation costs., Comment: Accepted for Publication in the Evolutionary Computation Journal by MIT Press

Lexicase selection is a semantic-aware parent selection method, which assesses individual test cases in a randomly-shuffled data stream. It has demonstrated success in multiple research areas including genetic programming, genetic algorithms, and more recently symbolic regression and deep learning. One potential drawback of lexicase selection and its variants is that the selection procedure requires evaluating training cases in a single data stream, making it difficult to handle tasks where the evaluation is computationally heavy or the dataset is large-scale, e.g., deep learning. In this work, we investigate how the weighted shuffle methods can be employed to improve the efficiency of lexicase selection. We propose a novel method, fast lexicase selection, which incorporates lexicase selection and weighted shuffle with partial evaluation. Experiments on both classic genetic programming and deep learning tasks indicate that the proposed method can significantly reduce the number of evaluation steps needed for lexicase selection to select an individual, improving its efficiency while maintaining the performance.

General program synthesis has become an important application area for genetic programming (GP), and for artificial intelligence more generally. Code Building Genetic Programming (CBGP) is a recently introduced GP method for general program synthesis that leverages reflection and first class specifications to support the evolution of programs that may use arbitrary data types, polymorphism, and functions drawn from existing codebases. However, neither a formal description nor a thorough benchmarking of CBGP have yet been reported. In this work, we formalize the method of CBGP using algorithms from type theory. Specially, we show that a functional programming language and a Hindley-Milner type system can be used to evolve type-safe programs using the process abstractly described in the original CBGP paper. Furthermore, we perform a comprehensive analysis of the search performance of this functional variant of CBGP compared to other contemporary GP program synthesis methods.

Down-sampling training data has long been shown to improve the generalization performance of a wide range of machine learning systems. Recently, down-sampling has proved effective in genetic programming (GP) runs that utilize the lexicase parent selection technique. Although this down-sampling procedure has been shown to significantly improve performance across a variety of problems, it does not seem to do so due to encouraging adaptability through environmental change. We hypothesize that the random sampling that is performed every generation causes discontinuities that result in the population being unable to adapt to the shifting environment. We investigate modifications to down-sampled lexicase selection in hopes of promoting incremental environmental change to scaffold evolution by reducing the amount of jarring discontinuities between the environments of successive generations. In our empirical studies, we find that forcing incremental environmental change is not significantly better for evolving solutions to program synthesis problems than simple random down-sampling. In response to this, we attempt to exacerbate the hypothesized prevalence of discontinuities by using only disjoint down-samples to see if it hinders performance. We find that this also does not significantly differ from the performance of regular random down-sampling. These negative results raise new questions about the ways in which the composition of sub-samples, which may include synonymous cases, may be expected to influence the performance of machine learning systems that use down-sampling., Comment: Accepted to The 2022 Conference on Artificial Life - Why it Didn't Work-Shop. 10 pages

In this paper we investigate why the running time of lexicase parent selection is empirically much lower than its worst-case bound of O(N*C). We define a measure of population diversity and prove that high diversity leads to low running times O(N + C) of lexicase selection. We then show empirically that genetic programming populations evolved under lexicase selection are diverse for several program synthesis problems, and explore the resulting differences in running time bounds., Comment: 12 pages, 3 figures

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., Comment: to be published in Artificial Life Journal

For the past six years, researchers in genetic programming and other program synthesis disciplines have used the General Program Synthesis Benchmark Suite to benchmark many aspects of automatic program synthesis systems. These problems have been used to make notable progress toward the goal of general program synthesis: automatically creating the types of software that human programmers code. Many of the systems that have attempted the problems in the original benchmark suite have used it to demonstrate performance improvements granted through new techniques. Over time, the suite has gradually become outdated, hindering the accurate measurement of further improvements. The field needs a new set of more difficult benchmark problems to move beyond what was previously possible. In this paper, we describe the 25 new general program synthesis benchmark problems that make up PSB2, a new benchmark suite. These problems are curated from a variety of sources, including programming katas and college courses. We selected these problems to be more difficult than those in the original suite, and give results using PushGP showing this increase in difficulty. These new problems give plenty of room for improvement, pointing the way for the next six or more years of general program synthesis research., Comment: To be published in GECCO 2021

Lexicase parent selection filters the population by considering one random training case at a time, eliminating any individuals with errors for the current case that are worse than the best error in the selection pool, until a single individual remains. This process often stops before considering all training cases, meaning that it will ignore the error values on any cases that were not yet considered. Lexicase selection can therefore select specialist individuals that have poor errors on some training cases, if they have great errors on others and those errors come near the start of the random list of cases used for the parent selection event in question. We hypothesize here that selecting these specialists, which may have poor total error, plays an important role in lexicase selection's observed performance advantages over error-aggregating parent selection methods such as tournament selection, which select specialists much less frequently. We conduct experiments examining this hypothesis, and find that lexicase selection's performance and diversity maintenance degrade when we deprive it of the ability of selecting specialists. These findings help explain the improved performance of lexicase selection compared to tournament selection, and suggest that specialists help drive evolution under lexicase selection toward global solutions.

Lexicase selection and novelty search, two parent selection methods used in evolutionary computation, emphasize exploring widely in the search space more than traditional methods such as tournament selection. However, lexicase selection is not explicitly driven to select for novelty in the population, and novelty search suffers from lack of direction toward a goal, especially in unconstrained, highly-dimensional spaces. We combine the strengths of lexicase selection and novelty search by creating a novelty score for each test case, and adding those novelty scores to the normal error values used in lexicase selection. We use this new novelty-lexicase selection to solve automatic program synthesis problems, and find it significantly outperforms both novelty search and lexicase selection. Additionally, we find that novelty search has very little success in the problem domain of program synthesis. We explore the effects of each of these methods on population diversity and long-term problem solving performance, and give evidence to support the hypothesis that novelty-lexicase selection resists converging to local optima better than lexicase selection.

Lexicase selection is a parent selection method that considers training cases individually, rather than in aggregate, when performing parent selection. Whereas previous work has demonstrated the ability of lexicase selection to solve difficult problems in program synthesis and symbolic regression, the central goal of this paper is to develop the theoretical underpinnings that explain its performance. To this end, we derive an analytical formula that gives the expected probabilities of selection under lexicase selection, given a population and its behavior. In addition, we expand upon the relation of lexicase selection to many-objective optimization methods to describe the behavior of lexicase selection, which is to select individuals on the boundaries of Pareto fronts in high-dimensional space. We show analytically why lexicase selection performs more poorly for certain sizes of population and training cases, and show why it has been shown to perform more poorly in continuous error spaces. To address this last concern, we propose new variants of epsilon-lexicase selection, a method that modifies the pass condition in lexicase selection to allow near-elite individuals to pass cases, thereby improving selection performance with continuous errors. We show that epsilon-lexicase outperforms several diversity-maintenance strategies on a number of real-world and synthetic regression problems., Comment: 30 pages, 8 figures. To appear in Evolutionary Computation Journal