Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
?3-[18]-{-0.958619, 0.316925, -0.82428, -0.416962, -0.022888}
?3-[19]-{-0.958619, 0.316925, 1.66873, -0.416962, 1.47864}
Outputs:
[ 0] = f(1.46631) = 2.27802
[ 1] = f(-0.611939) = 1.22418
[ 2] = f(0.707672) = 0.831081
[ 3] = f(0.506866) = 0.891514
[ 4] = f(1.97852) = -0.236276
[ 5] = f(-0.950196) = 0.049822
[ 6] = f(1.67365) = 2.23274
[ 7] = f(-0.348816) = 0.651425
[ 8] = f(0.38797) = 0.856839
[ 9] = f(1.46631) = 2.27802
[10] = f(-0.022888) = 1.01508
[11] = f(1.46631) = 2.27802
[12] = f(0.748627) = 0.252069
[13] = f(1.46631) = 2.27802
[14] = f(1.05301) = 2.04831
[15] = f(1.46631) = 2.27802
[16] = f(1.67365) = 2.23274
[17] = f(1.5303) = -0.246576
[18] = f(-0.416962) = 1.21182
[19] = f(-0.416962) = 1.21182
It is worth noticing that, except for the clones created by elitism, the arrays
of random numerical constants of all these best-of-generation individuals
are all different as a very high mutation rate (55%) was used to create new
numerical constants. Note, however, that, in all cases, the gene sequence was
kept unchanged and they all are expressing constant
c
2
= 1.46631.
In the next generation a new individual was created (chromosome 2) that
is better than all its ancestors (this individual is shown in bold):
GENERATION N: 7
Structures:
?2-[ 0]-{-0.699127, -0.853363, 1.46631, 1.74533, 0.160522}
?0-[ 1]-{1.67365, 0.431702, 0.121093, -0.13208, 1.94092}
?2-[ 2]-{0.697174, -0.611939, 1.44742, 1.29065, 0.037323}
?2-[ 3]-{1.49399, -0.401642, -0.434051, 0.041168, 0.160522}
?3-[ 4]-{1.55374, 0.249176, -0.582947, -0.411377, 0.160522}
?2-[ 5]-{1.49783, -0.401642, 1.46631, -0.348816, 0.763977}
?1-[ 6]-{0.818024, -0.75528, 0.568451, -0.247955, 1.97852}
?1-[ 7]-{0.19223, 0.748627, 0.05075, -0.582947, 0.059295}
?2-[ 8]-{-0.827027, 0.249176, -0.686157, -0.348816, 0.160522}
?4-[ 9]-{1.88129, 1.72037, 1.46631, 0.041168, 1.67365}
?3-[10]-{-0.958619, 0.316925, 0.033294, 0.626953, 1.47864}
