Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
169 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Mining Potentially Explanatory Patterns via Partial Solutions (2404.04388v2)

Published 5 Apr 2024 in cs.NE and cs.LG

Abstract: Genetic Algorithms have established their capability for solving many complex optimization problems. Even as good solutions are produced, the user's understanding of a problem is not necessarily improved, which can lead to a lack of confidence in the results. To mitigate this issue, explainability aims to give insight to the user by presenting them with the knowledge obtained by the algorithm. In this paper we introduce Partial Solutions in order to improve the explainability of solutions to combinatorial optimization problems. Partial Solutions represent beneficial traits found by analyzing a population, and are presented to the user for explainability, but also provide an explicit model from which new solutions can be generated. We present an algorithm that assembles a collection of Partial Solutions chosen to strike a balance between high fitness, simplicity and atomicity. Experiments with standard benchmarks show that the proposed algorithm is able to find Partial Solutions which improve explainability at reasonable computational cost without affecting search performance.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (31)
  1. The Intersection of Evolutionary Computation and Explainable AI. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion (Boston, Massachusetts) (GECCO ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1757–1762. https://doi.org/10.1145/3520304.3533974
  2. Shumeet Baluja and Scott Davies. 1997. Using Optimal Dependency-Trees for Combinational Optimization. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML ’97). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 30–38.
  3. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information Fusion 58 (2020), 82–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012
  4. Markov Random Field Modelling of Royal Road Genetic Algorithms. In Artificial Evolution, Pierre Collet, Cyril Fonlupt, Jin-Kao Hao, Evelyne Lutton, and Marc Schoenauer (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 65–76.
  5. Alexander E.I. Brownlee. 2016. Mining Markov Network Surrogates for Value-Added Optimisation. In Proceedings of the 2016 on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion (Denver, Colorado, USA) (GECCO ’16 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1267–1274. https://doi.org/10.1145/2908961.2931711
  6. Alexander Edward Ian Brownlee. 2009. Multivariate Markov networks for fitness modelling in an estimation of distribution algorithm. Ph. D. Dissertation. ”Robert Gordon University”.
  7. Using a Markov network as a surrogate fitness function in a genetic algorithm. In IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. IEEE, New York City, USA, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2010.5586548
  8. Giancarlo Catalano. 2024. PS Assisted Explainability. https://github.com/Giancarlo-Catalano/PS_Minimal_Showcase
  9. Jack McKay Fletcher and Thomas Wennekers. 2017. A natural approach to studying schema processing. arXiv:1705.04536 [cs.NE]
  10. Non-deterministic solvers and explainable AI through trajectory mining. SICSA XAI Workshop 2021 2894 (6 2021), 75–78. https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/output/1395881https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/output/1395881.abstract
  11. Towards explainable metaheuristics: Feature extraction from trajectory mining. Expert Systems n/a, n/a (2021), e13494. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.13494 arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/exsy.13494
  12. David E Goldberg. 1989. Genetic algorithms and Walsh functions: Part 2, Deception and its analysis. Complex systems 3 (1989), 153–171.
  13. Discovering Deep Building Blocks for Competent Genetic Algorithms Using Chance Discovery via KeyGraphs. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Tokyo, Japan, 276–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-06230-2_19
  14. Viewpoint: When Will AI Exceed Human Performance? Evidence from AI Experts. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 62 (7 2018), 729–754. https://doi.org/10.1613/JAIR.1.11222
  15. Juris Hartmanis. 2006. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness (Michael R. Garey and David S. Johnson). https://doi.org/10.1137/1024022 24 (7 2006), 90–91. Issue 1. https://doi.org/10.1137/1024022
  16. John H. Holland. 1992. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence. The MIT Press, Massachussets, USA. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1090.001.0001
  17. Shih-Huan Hsu and Tian-Li Yu. 2015. Optimization by pairwise linkage detection, incremental linkage set, and restricted/back mixing: DSMGA-II. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 519–526.
  18. The Royal Road for Genetic Algorithms: Fitness Landscapes and GA Performance. European Conference on Artificial Life 1 (11 1992), 23–33.
  19. When will a genetic algorithm outperform hill climbing?. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (Denver, Colorado) (NIPS’93). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 51–58.
  20. Sanghoun Oh and Chang Wook Ahn. 2023. Evolutionary Approach for Interpretable Feature Selection Algorithm in Manufacturing Industry. IEEE Access 11 (2023), 46604–46614. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3274490
  21. A survey of optimization by building and using probabilistic models. Computational optimization and applications 21 (2002), 5–20.
  22. L. Rabiner. 1984. Combinatorial optimization:Algorithms and complexity. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing 32 (12 1984), 1258–1259. Issue 6. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASSP.1984.1164450
  23. Using a Markov Network Model in a Univariate EDA: An Empirical Cost-Benefit Analysis. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Washington DC, USA) (GECCO ’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 727–734. https://doi.org/10.1145/1068009.1068130
  24. John Slaney and Toby Walsh. 2001. Backbones in Optimization and Approximation. In Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence - Volume 1 (Seattle, WA, USA) (IJCAI’01). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 254–259. https://doi.org/10.5555/1642090.1642125
  25. Dirk Thierens and Peter AN Bosman. 2011a. Optimal mixing evolutionary algorithms. In Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 617–624.
  26. Dirk Thierens and Peter A.N. Bosman. 2011b. Optimal Mixing Evolutionary Algorithms. In Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Dublin, Ireland) (GECCO ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 617–624. https://doi.org/10.1145/2001576.2001661
  27. Chris Thornton. 1997. The building block fallacy. Complexity International 4 (1997), 1–1.
  28. Pamela H. Vance. 2006. Knapsack Problems: Algorithms and Computer Implementations (S. Martello and P. Toth). https://doi.org/10.1137/1035174 35 (7 2006), 684–685. Issue 4. https://doi.org/10.1137/1035174
  29. David White. 2014. An Overview of Schema Theory. arXiv:1401.2651 [cs.NE]
  30. Explainable AI: A Brief Survey on History, Research Areas, Approaches and Challenges. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 11839 LNAI (2019), 563–574. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32236-6_51/FIGURES/12
  31. Tian-Li Yu and David E. Goldberg. 2006. Conquering Hierarchical Difficulty by Explicit Chunking: Substructural Chromosome Compression. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Seattle, Washington, USA) (GECCO ’06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1385–1392. https://doi.org/10.1145/1143997.1144210

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now