A morphing algorithm for generating near optimal grids Applications in computational medici

合集下载

Graph mining Laws, generators, and algorithms

Graph mining Laws, generators, and algorithms
Graph Mining: Laws, Generators and Algorithms
DEEPAYAN CHAKRABARTI and CHRISTOS FALOUTSOS Yahoo! Research and Carnegie Mellon University
How does the Web look? How could we tell an “abnormal” social network from a “normal” one? These and similar questions are important in many fields where the data can intuitively be cast as a graph; examples range from computer networks to sociology to biology and many more. Indeed, any M : N relation in database terminology can be represented as a graph. A lot of these questions boil down to the following: “How can we generate synthetic but realistic graphs?” To answer this, we must first understand what patterns are common in real-world graphs, and can thus be considered a mark of normality/realism. This survey give an overview of the incredible variety of work that has been done on these problems. One of our main contributions is the integration of points of view from physics, mathematics, sociology and computer science. Further, we briefly describe recent advances on some related and interesting graph problems. Categories and Subject Descriptors: E.1 [Data Structures]: General Terms: Algorithms, Measurement Additional Key Words and Phrases: Generators, graphs, patterns, social networks

外文文献—遗传算法

外文文献—遗传算法

附录I 英文翻译第一部分英文原文文章来源:书名:《自然赋予灵感的元启发示算法》第二、三章出版社:英国Luniver出版社出版日期:2008Chapter 2Genetic Algorithms2.1 IntroductionThe genetic algorithm (GA), developed by John Holland and his collaborators in the 1960s and 1970s, is a model or abstraction of biolo gical evolution based on Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection. Holland was the first to use the crossover and recombination, mutation, and selection in the study of adaptive and artificial systems. These genetic operators form the essential part of the genetic algorithm as a problem-solving strategy. Since then, many variants of genetic algorithms have been developed and applied to a wide range of optimization problems, from graph colouring to pattern recognition, from discrete systems (such as the travelling salesman problem) to continuous systems (e.g., the efficient design of airfoil in aerospace engineering), and from financial market to multiobjective engineering optimization.There are many advantages of genetic algorithms over traditional optimization algorithms, and two most noticeable advantages are: the ability of dealing with complex problems and parallelism. Genetic algorithms can deal with various types of optimization whether the objective (fitness) functionis stationary or non-stationary (change with time), linear or nonlinear, continuous or discontinuous, or with random noise. As multiple offsprings in a population act like independent agents, the population (or any subgroup) can explore the search space in many directions simultaneously. This feature makes it ideal to parallelize the algorithms for implementation. Different parameters and even different groups of strings can be manipulated at the same time.However, genetic algorithms also have some disadvantages.The formulation of fitness function, the usage of population size, the choice of the important parameters such as the rate of mutation and crossover, and the selection criteria criterion of new population should be carefully carried out. Any inappropriate choice will make it difficult for the algorithm to converge, or it simply produces meaningless results.2.2 Genetic Algorithms2.2.1 Basic ProcedureThe essence of genetic algorithms involves the encoding of an optimization function as arrays of bits or character strings to represent the chromosomes, the manipulation operations of strings by genetic operators, and the selection according to their fitness in the aim to find a solution to the problem concerned. This is often done by the following procedure:1) encoding of the objectives or optimization functions; 2) defining a fitness function or selection criterion; 3) creating a population of individuals; 4) evolution cycle or iterations by evaluating the fitness of allthe individuals in the population,creating a new population by performing crossover, and mutation,fitness-proportionate reproduction etc, and replacing the old population and iterating again using the new population;5) decoding the results to obtain the solution to the problem. These steps can schematically be represented as the pseudo code of genetic algorithms shown in Fig. 2.1.One iteration of creating a new population is called a generation. The fixed-length character strings are used in most of genetic algorithms during each generation although there is substantial research on the variable-length strings and coding structures.The coding of the objective function is usually in the form of binary arrays or real-valued arrays in the adaptive genetic algorithms. For simplicity, we use binary strings for encoding and decoding. The genetic operators include crossover,mutation, and selection from the population.The crossover of two parent strings is the main operator with a higher probability and is carried out by swapping one segment of one chromosome with the corresponding segment on another chromosome at a random position (see Fig.2.2).The crossover carried out in this way is a single-point crossover. Crossover at multiple points is also used in many genetic algorithms to increase the efficiency of the algorithms.The mutation operation is achieved by flopping the randomly selected bits (see Fig. 2.3), and the mutation probability is usually small. The selection of anindividual in a population is carried out by the evaluation of its fitness, and it can remain in the new generation if a certain threshold of the fitness is reached or the reproduction of a population is fitness-proportionate. That is to say, the individuals with higher fitness are more likely to reproduce.2.2.2 Choice of ParametersAn important issue is the formulation or choice of an appropriate fitness function that determines the selection criterion in a particular problem. For the minimization of a function using genetic algorithms, one simple way of constructing a fitness function is to use the simplest form F = A−y with A being a large constant (though A = 0 will do) and y = f(x), thus the objective is to maximize the fitness function and subsequently minimize the objective function f(x). However, there are many different ways of defining a fitness function.For example, we can use the individual fitness assignment relative to the whole populationwhere is the phenotypic value of individual i, and N is the population size. The appropriateform of the fitness function will make sure that the solutions with higher fitness should be selected efficiently. Poor fitness function may result in incorrect or meaningless solutions.Another important issue is the choice of various parameters.The crossover probability is usually very high, typically in the range of 0.7~1.0. On the other hand, the mutation probability is usually small (usually 0.001 _ 0.05). If is too small, then the crossover occurs sparsely, which is not efficient for evolution. If the mutation probability is too high, the solutions could still ‘jump around’ even if the optimal solution is approaching.The selection criterion is also important. How to select the current population so that the best individuals with higher fitness should be preserved and passed onto the next generation. That is often carried out in association with certain elitism. The basic elitism is to select the most fit individual (in each generation) which will be carried over to the new generation without being modified by genetic operators. This ensures that the best solution is achieved more quickly.Other issues include the multiple sites for mutation and the population size. The mutation at a single site is not very efficient, mutation at multiple sites will increase the evolution efficiency. However, too many mutants will make it difficult for the system to converge or even make the system go astray to the wrong solutions. In reality, if the mutation is too high under high selection pressure, then the whole population might go extinct.In addition, the choice of the right population size is also very important. If the population size is too small, there is not enough evolution going on, and there is a risk for the whole population to go extinct. In the real world, a species with a small population, ecological theory suggests that there is a real danger of extinction for such species. Even the system carries on, there is still a danger of premature convergence. In a small population, if a significantly more fit individual appears too early, it may reproduces enough offsprings so that they overwhelm the whole (small) population. This will eventually drive the system to a local optimum (not the global optimum). On the other hand, if the population is too large, more evaluations of the objectivefunction are needed, which will require extensive computing time.Furthermore, more complex and adaptive genetic algorithms are under active research and the literature is vast about these topics.2.3 ImplementationUsing the basic procedure described in the above section, we can implement the genetic algorithms in any programming language. For simplicity of demonstrating how it works, we have implemented a function optimization using a simple GA in both Matlab and Octave.For the generalized De Jong’s test function where is a positive integer andr > 0 is the half length of the domain. This function has a minimum of at . For the values of , r = 100 and n = 5 as well as a population size of 40 16-bit strings, the variations of the objective function during a typical run are shown in Fig. 2.4. Any two runs will give slightly different results dueto the stochastic nature of genetic algorithms, but better estimates are obtained as the number of generations increases.For the well-known Easom functionit has a global maximum at (see Fig. 2.5). Now we can use the following Matlab/Octave to find its global maximum. In our implementation, we have used fixedlength 16-bit strings. The probabilities of crossover and mutation are respectivelyAs it is a maximization problem, we can use the simplest fitness function F = f(x).The outputs from a typical run are shown in Fig. 2.6 where the top figure shows the variations of the best estimates as they approach while the lower figure shows the variations of the fitness function.% Genetic Algorithm (Simple Demo) Matlab/Octave Program% Written by X S Yang (Cambridge University)% Usage: gasimple or gasimple(‘x*exp(-x)’);function [bestsol, bestfun,count]=gasimple(funstr)global solnew sol pop popnew fitness fitold f range;if nargin<1,% Easom Function with fmax=1 at x=pifunstr=‘-cos(x)*exp(-(x-3.1415926)^2)’;endrange=[-10 10]; % Range/Domain% Converting to an inline functionf=vectorize(inline(funstr));% Generating the initil populationrand(‘state’,0’); % Reset the random generatorpopsize=20; % Population sizeMaxGen=100; % Max number of generationscount=0; % counternsite=2; % number of mutation sitespc=0.95; % Crossover probabilitypm=0.05; % Mutation probabilitynsbit=16; % String length (bits)% Generating initial populationpopnew=init_gen(popsize,nsbit);fitness=zeros(1,popsize); % fitness array% Display the shape of the functionx=range(1):0.1:range(2); plot(x,f(x));% Initialize solution <- initial populationfor i=1:popsize,solnew(i)=bintodec(popnew(i,:));end% Start the evolution loopfor i=1:MaxGen,% Record as the historyfitold=fitness; pop=popnew; sol=solnew;for j=1:popsize,% Crossover pairii=floor(popsize*rand)+1; jj=floor(popsize*rand)+1;% Cross overif pc>rand,[popnew(ii,:),popnew(jj,:)]=...crossover(pop(ii,:),pop(jj,:));% Evaluate the new pairscount=count+2;evolve(ii); evolve(jj);end% Mutation at n sitesif pm>rand,kk=floor(popsize*rand)+1; count=count+1;popnew(kk,:)=mutate(pop(kk,:),nsite);evolve(kk);endend % end for j% Record the current bestbestfun(i)=max(fitness);bestsol(i)=mean(sol(bestfun(i)==fitness));end% Display resultssubplot(2,1,1); plot(bestsol); title(‘Best estimates’); subplot(2,1,2); plot(bestfun); title(‘Fitness’);% ------------- All sub functions ----------% generation of initial populationfunction pop=init_gen(np,nsbit)% String length=nsbit+1 with pop(:,1) for the Signpop=rand(np,nsbit+1)>0.5;% Evolving the new generationfunction evolve(j)global solnew popnew fitness fitold pop sol f;solnew(j)=bintodec(popnew(j,:));fitness(j)=f(solnew(j));if fitness(j)>fitold(j),pop(j,:)=popnew(j,:);sol(j)=solnew(j);end% Convert a binary string into a decimal numberfunction [dec]=bintodec(bin)global range;% Length of the string without signnn=length(bin)-1;num=bin(2:end); % get the binary% Sign=+1 if bin(1)=0; Sign=-1 if bin(1)=1.Sign=1-2*bin(1);dec=0;% floating point.decimal place in the binarydp=floor(log2(max(abs(range))));for i=1:nn,dec=dec+num(i)*2^(dp-i);enddec=dec*Sign;% Crossover operatorfunction [c,d]=crossover(a,b)nn=length(a)-1;% generating random crossover pointcpoint=floor(nn*rand)+1;c=[a(1:cpoint) b(cpoint+1:end)];d=[b(1:cpoint) a(cpoint+1:end)];% Mutatation operatorfunction anew=mutate(a,nsite)nn=length(a); anew=a;for i=1:nsite,j=floor(rand*nn)+1;anew(j)=mod(a(j)+1,2);endThe above Matlab program can easily be extended to higher dimensions. In fact, there is no need to do any programming (if you prefer) because there are many software packages (either freeware or commercial) about genetic algorithms. For example, Matlab itself has an extra optimization toolbox.Biology-inspired algorithms have many advantages over traditional optimization methods such as the steepest descent and hill-climbing and calculus-based techniques due to the parallelism and the ability of locating the very good approximate solutions in extremely very large search spaces.Furthermore, more powerful new generation algorithms can be formulated by combiningexisting and new evolutionary algorithms with classical optimization methods.Chapter 3Ant AlgorithmsFrom the discussion of genetic algorithms, we know that we can improve the search efficiency by using randomness which will also increase the diversity of the solutions so as to avoid being trapped in local optima. The selection of the best individuals is also equivalent to use memory. In fact, there are other forms of selection such as using chemical messenger (pheromone) which is commonly used by ants, honey bees, and many other insects. In this chapter, we will discuss the nature-inspired ant colony optimization (ACO), which is a metaheuristic method.3.1 Behaviour of AntsAnts are social insects in habit and they live together in organized colonies whose population size can range from about 2 to 25 millions. When foraging, a swarm of ants or mobile agents interact or communicate in their local environment. Each ant can lay scent chemicals or pheromone so as to communicate with others, and each ant is also able to follow the route marked with pheromone laid by other ants. When ants find a food source, they will mark it with pheromone and also mark the trails to and from it. From the initial random foraging route, the pheromone concentration varies and the ants follow the route with higher pheromone concentration, and the pheromone is enhanced by the increasing number of ants. As more and more ants follow the same route, it becomes the favoured path. Thus, some favourite routes (often the shortest or more efficient) emerge. This is actually a positive feedback mechanism.Emerging behaviour exists in an ant colony and such emergence arises from simple interactions among individual ants. Individual ants act according to simple and local information (such as pheromone concentration) to carry out their activities. Although there is no master ant overseeing the entire colony and broadcasting instructions to the individual ants, organized behaviour still emerges automatically. Therefore, such emergent behaviour is similar to other self-organized phenomena which occur in many processes in nature such as the pattern formation in animal skins (tiger and zebra skins).The foraging pattern of some ant species (such as the army ants) can show extraordinary regularity. Army ants search for food along some regular routes with an angle of about apart. We do not know how they manage to follow such regularity, but studies show that they could move in an area and build a bivouac and start foraging. On the first day, they forage in a random direction, say, the north and travel a few hundred meters, then branch to cover a large area. The next day, they will choose a different direction, which is about from the direction on the previous day and cover a large area. On the following day, they again choose a different direction about from the second day’s direction. In this way, they cover the whole area over about 2 weeks and they move out to a different location to build a bivouac and forage again.The interesting thing is that they do not use the angle of (this would mean that on the fourth day, they will search on the empty area already foraged on the first day). The beauty of this angle is that it leaves an angle of about from the direction on the first day. This means they cover the whole circle in 14 days without repeating (or covering a previously-foraged area). This is an amazing phenomenon.3.2 Ant Colony OptimizationBased on these characteristics of ant behaviour, scientists have developed a number ofpowerful ant colony algorithms with important progress made in recent years. Marco Dorigo pioneered the research in this area in 1992. In fact, we only use some of the nature or the behaviour of ants and add some new characteristics, we can devise a class of new algorithms.The basic steps of the ant colony optimization (ACO) can be summarized as the pseudo code shown in Fig. 3.1.Two important issues here are: the probability of choosing a route, and the evaporation rate of pheromone. There are a few ways of solving these problems although it is still an area of active research. Here we introduce the current best method. For a network routing problem, the probability of ants at a particular node to choose the route from node to node is given bywhere and are the influence parameters, and their typical values are .is the pheromone concentration on the route between and , and the desirability ofthe same route. Some knowledge about the route such as the distance is often used so that ,which implies that shorter routes will be selected due to their shorter travelling time, and thus the pheromone concentrations on these routes are higher.This probability formula reflects the fact that ants would normally follow the paths with higher pheromone concentrations. In the simpler case when , the probability of choosing a path by ants is proportional to the pheromone concentration on the path. The denominator normalizes the probability so that it is in the range between 0 and 1.The pheromone concentration can change with time due to the evaporation of pheromone. Furthermore, the advantage of pheromone evaporation is that the system could avoid being trapped in local optima. If there is no evaporation, then the path randomly chosen by the first ants will become the preferred path as the attraction of other ants by their pheromone. For a constant rate of pheromone decay or evaporation, the pheromone concentration usually varies with time exponentiallywhere is the initial concentration of pheromone and t is time. If , then we have . For the unitary time increment , the evaporation can beapproximated by . Therefore, we have the simplified pheromone update formula:where is the rate of pheromone evaporation. The increment is the amount of pheromone deposited at time t along route to when an ant travels a distance . Usually . If there are no ants on a route, then the pheromone deposit is zero.There are other variations to these basic procedures. A possible acceleration scheme is to use some bounds of the pheromone concentration and only the ants with the current global best solution(s) are allowed to deposit pheromone. In addition, certain ranking of solution fitness can also be used. These are hot topics of current research.3.3 Double Bridge ProblemA standard test problem for ant colony optimization is the simplest double bridge problem with two branches (see Fig. 3.2) where route (2) is shorter than route (1). The angles of these two routes are equal at both point A and pointB so that the ants have equal chance (or 50-50 probability) of choosing each route randomly at the initial stage at point A.Initially, fifty percent of the ants would go along the longer route (1) and the pheromone evaporates at a constant rate, but the pheromone concentration will become smaller as route (1) is longer and thus takes more time to travel through. Conversely, the pheromone concentration on the shorter route will increase steadily. After some iterations, almost all the ants will move along the shorter route. Figure 3.3 shows the initial snapshot of 10 ants (5 on each route initially) and the snapshot after 5 iterations (or equivalent to 50 ants have moved along this section). Well, there are 11 ants, and one has not decided which route to follow as it just comes near to the entrance.Almost all the ants (well, about 90% in this case) move along the shorter route.Here we only use two routes at the node, it is straightforward to extend it to the multiple routes at a node. It is expected that only the shortest route will be chosen ultimately. As any complex network system is always made of individual nodes, this algorithms can be extended to solve complex routing problems reasonably efficiently. In fact, the ant colony algorithms have been successfully applied to the Internet routing problem, the travelling salesman problem, combinatorial optimization problems, and other NP-hard problems.3.4 Virtual Ant AlgorithmAs we know that ant colony optimization has successfully solved NP-hard problems such asthe travelling salesman problem, it can also be extended to solve the standard optimization problems of multimodal functions. The only problem now is to figure out how the ants will move on an n-dimensional hyper-surface. For simplicity, we will discuss the 2-D case which can easily be extended to higher dimensions. On a 2D landscape, ants can move in any direction or , but this will cause some problems. How to update the pheromone at a particular point as there are infinite number of points. One solution is to track the history of each ant moves and record the locations consecutively, and the other approach is to use a moving neighbourhood or window. The ants ‘smell’ the pheromone concentration of their neighbourhood at any particular location.In addition, we can limit the number of directions the ants can move by quantizing the directions. For example, ants are only allowed to move left and right, and up and down (only 4 directions). We will use this quantized approach here, which will make the implementation much simpler. Furthermore, the objective function or landscape can be encoded into virtual food so that ants will move to the best locations where the best food sources are. This will make the search process even more simpler. This simplified algorithm is called Virtual Ant Algorithm (VAA) developed by Xin-She Yang and his colleagues in 2006, which has been successfully applied to topological optimization problems in engineering.The following Keane function with multiple peaks is a standard test functionThis function without any constraint is symmetric and has two highest peaks at (0, 1.39325) and (1.39325, 0). To make the problem harder, it is usually optimized under two constraints:This makes the optimization difficult because it is now nearly symmetric about x = y and the peaks occur in pairs where one is higher than the other. In addition, the true maximum is, which is defined by a constraint boundary.Figure 3.4 shows the surface variations of the multi-peaked function. If we use 50 roaming ants and let them move around for 25 iterations, then the pheromone concentrations (also equivalent to the paths of ants) are displayed in Fig. 3.4. We can see that the highest pheromoneconcentration within the constraint boundary corresponds to the optimal solution.It is worth pointing out that ant colony algorithms are the right tool for combinatorial and discrete optimization. They have the advantages over other stochastic algorithms such as genetic algorithms and simulated annealing in dealing with dynamical network routing problems.For continuous decision variables, its performance is still under active research. For the present example, it took about 1500 evaluations of the objective function so as to find the global optima. This is not as efficient as other metaheuristic methods, especially comparing with particle swarm optimization. This is partly because the handling of the pheromone takes time. Is it possible to eliminate the pheromone and just use the roaming ants? The answer is yes. Particle swarm optimization is just the right kind of algorithm for such further modifications which will be discussed later in detail.第二部分中文翻译第二章遗传算法2.1 引言遗传算法是由John Holland和他的同事于二十世纪六七十年代提出的基于查尔斯·达尔文的自然选择学说而发展的一种生物进化的抽象模型。

a转换成膜a算法

a转换成膜a算法

a转换成膜a算法As technology continues to advance at a rapid pace, it is crucial for algorithms to evolve and adapt accordingly. One algorithm that has garnered significant attention in recent years is the "a to b" algorithm. This algorithm, which aims to convert 'a' into 'b', is essential for various applications in data processing and analysis.随着技术的快速发展,算法需要不断演变和适应。

最近几年受到广泛关注的一种算法是“a转换成b”算法。

这种算法旨在将'a'转换为'b',在数据处理和分析等各种应用中起着关键作用。

One of the primary requirements for the "a to b" algorithm is efficiency. The algorithm should be able to convert 'a' into 'b' quickly and accurately, without compromising the quality of the output. This efficiency is essential for applications where real-time processing and response are crucial.“a转换成b”算法的主要要求之一是效率。

遗传算法中英文对照外文翻译文献

遗传算法中英文对照外文翻译文献

遗传算法中英文对照外文翻译文献遗传算法中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)Improved Genetic Algorithm and Its Performance AnalysisAbstract: Although genetic algorithm has become very famous with its global searching, parallel computing, better robustness, and not needing differential information during evolution. However, it also has some demerits, such as slow convergence speed. In this paper, based on several general theorems, an improved genetic algorithm using variant chromosome length and probability of crossover and mutation is proposed, and its main idea is as follows : at the beginning of evolution, our solution with shorter length chromosome and higher probability of crossover and mutation; and at the vicinity of global optimum, with longer length chromosome and lower probability of crossover and mutation. Finally, testing with some critical functions shows that our solution can improve the convergence speed of genetic algorithm significantly , its comprehensive performance is better than that of the genetic algorithm which only reserves the best individual.Genetic algorithm is an adaptive searching technique based on a selection and reproduction mechanism found in the natural evolution process, and it was pioneered by Holland in the 1970s. It has become very famous with its global searching,________________________________ 遗传算法中英文对照外文翻译文献 ________________________________ parallel computing, better robustness, and not needing differential information during evolution. However, it also has some demerits, such as poor local searching, premature converging, as well as slow convergence speed. In recent years, these problems have been studied.In this paper, an improved genetic algorithm with variant chromosome length andvariant probability is proposed. Testing with some critical functions shows that it can improve the convergence speed significantly, and its comprehensive performance is better than that of the genetic algorithm which only reserves the best individual.In section 1, our new approach is proposed. Through optimization examples, insection 2, the efficiency of our algorithm is compared with the genetic algorithm which only reserves the best individual. And section 3 gives out the conclusions. Finally, some proofs of relative theorems are collected and presented in appendix.1 Description of the algorithm1.1 Some theoremsBefore proposing our approach, we give out some general theorems (see appendix)as follows: Let us assume there is just one variable (multivariable can be divided into many sections, one section for one variable) x £ [ a, b ] , x £ R, and chromosome length with binary encoding is 1.Theorem 1 Minimal resolution of chromosome isb 一 a2l — 1Theorem 3 Mathematical expectation Ec(x) of chromosome searching stepwith one-point crossover iswhere Pc is the probability of crossover.Theorem 4 Mathematical expectation Em ( x ) of chromosome searching step with bit mutation isE m ( x ) = ( b- a) P m 遗传算法中英文对照外文翻译文献Theorem 2 wi = 2l -1 2 i -1 Weight value of the ith bit of chromosome is(i = 1,2,・・・l )E *)= P c1.2 Mechanism of algorithmDuring evolutionary process, we presume that value domains of variable are fixed, and the probability of crossover is a constant, so from Theorem 1 and 3, we know that the longer chromosome length is, the smaller searching step of chromosome, and the higher resolution; and vice versa. Meanwhile, crossover probability is in direct proportion to searching step. From Theorem 4, changing the length of chromosome does not affect searching step of mutation, while mutation probability is also in direct proportion to searching step.At the beginning of evolution, shorter length chromosome( can be too shorter, otherwise it is harmful to population diversity ) and higher probability of crossover and mutation increases searching step, which can carry out greater domain searching, and avoid falling into local optimum. While at the vicinity of global optimum, longer length chromosome and lower probability of crossover and mutation will decrease searching step, and longer length chromosome also improves resolution of mutation, which avoid wandering near the global optimum, and speeds up algorithm converging.Finally, it should be pointed out that chromosome length changing keeps individual fitness unchanged, hence it does not affect select ion ( with roulette wheel selection) .2.3 Description of the algorithmOwing to basic genetic algorithm not converging on the global optimum, while the genetic algorithm which reserves the best individual at current generation can, our approach adopts this policy. During evolutionary process, we track cumulative average of individual average fitness up to current generation. It is written as1 X G x(t)= G f vg (t)t=1where G is the current evolutionary generation, 'avg is individual average fitness.When the cumulative average fitness increases to k times ( k> 1, k £ R) of initial individual average fitness, we change chromosome length to m times ( m is a positive integer ) of itself , and reduce probability of crossover and mutation, which_______________________________ 遗传算法中英文对照外文翻译文献________________________________can improve individual resolution and reduce searching step, and speed up algorithm converging. The procedure is as follows:Step 1 Initialize population, and calculate individual average fitness f avg0, and set change parameter flag. Flag equal to 1.Step 2 Based on reserving the best individual of current generation, carry out selection, regeneration, crossover and mutation, and calculate cumulative average of individual average fitness up to current generation 'avg ;f avgStep 3 If f vgg0 三k and Flag equals 1, increase chromosome length to m times of itself, and reduce probability of crossover and mutation, and set Flag equal to 0; otherwise continue evolving.Step 4 If end condition is satisfied, stop; otherwise go to Step 2.2 Test and analysisWe adopt the following two critical functions to test our approach, and compare it with the genetic algorithm which only reserves the best individual:sin 2 弋 x2 + y2 - 0.5 [1 + 0.01( 2 + y 2)]x, y G [-5,5]f (x, y) = 4 - (x2 + 2y2 - 0.3cos(3n x) - 0.4cos(4n y))x, y G [-1,1]22. 1 Analysis of convergenceDuring function testing, we carry out the following policies: roulette wheel select ion, one point crossover, bit mutation, and the size of population is 60, l is chromosome length, Pc and Pm are the probability of crossover and mutation respectively. And we randomly select four genetic algorithms reserving best individual with various fixed chromosome length and probability of crossover and mutation to compare with our approach. Tab. 1 gives the average converging generation in 100 tests.In our approach, we adopt initial parameter l0= 10, Pc0= 0.3, Pm0= 0.1 and k= 1.2, when changing parameter condition is satisfied, we adjust parameters to l= 30, Pc= 0.1, Pm= 0.01.From Tab. 1, we know that our approach improves convergence speed of genetic algorithm significantly and it accords with above analysis.2.2 Analysis of online and offline performanceQuantitative evaluation methods of genetic algorithm are proposed by Dejong, including online and offline performance. The former tests dynamic performance; and the latter evaluates convergence performance. To better analyze online and offline performance of testing function, w e multiply fitness of each individual by 10, and we give a curve of 4 000 and 1 000 generations for fl and f2, respectively.(a) onlineFig. 1 Online and offline performance of fl(a) online (b) onlineFig. 2 Online and offline performance of f2From Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, we know that online performance of our approach is just little worse than that of the fourth case, but it is much better than that of the second, third and fifth case, whose online performances are nearly the same. At the same time, offline performance of our approach is better than that of other four cases.3 ConclusionIn this paper, based on some general theorems, an improved genetic algorithmusing variant chromosome length and probability of crossover and mutation is proposed. Testing with some critical functions shows that it can improve convergence speed of genetic algorithm significantly, and its comprehensive performance is better than that of the genetic algorithm which only reserves the best individual.AppendixWith the supposed conditions of section 1, we know that the validation of Theorem 1 and Theorem 2 are obvious.Theorem 3 Mathematical expectation Ec(x) of chromosome searching step with one point crossover isb - a PEc(x) = 21 cwhere Pc is the probability of crossover.Proof As shown in Fig. A1, we assume that crossover happens on the kth locus, i. e. parent,s locus from k to l do not change, and genes on the locus from 1 to k are exchanged.During crossover, change probability of genes on the locus from 1 to k is 2 (“1” to “0” or “0” to “1”). So, after crossover, mathematical expectation of chromosome searching step on locus from 1 to k is1 chromosome is equal, namely l Pc. Therefore, after crossover, mathematical expectation of chromosome searching step isE (x ) = T 1 -• P • E (x ) c l c ckk =1Substituting Eq. ( A1) into Eq. ( A2) , we obtain 尸 11 b - a p b - a p • (b - a ) 1 E (x ) = T • P • — •• (2k -1) = 7c • • [(2z -1) ― l ] = ——— (1 一 )c l c 2 21 — 121 21 — 1 21 21 —1 k =1 lb - a _where l is large,-——-口 0, so E (x ) 口 -——P2l — 1 c 21 c 遗传算法中英文对照外文翻译文献 厂 / 、 T 1 T 1 b — a - 1E (x )="—w ="一• ---------- • 2 j -1 二 •ck2 j 2 21 -1 2j =1 j =1 Furthermore, probability of taking • (2k -1) place crossover on each locus ofFig. A1 One point crossoverTheorem 4 Mathematical expectation E m(")of chromosome searching step with bit mutation E m (x)—(b a)* P m, where Pm is the probability of mutation.Proof Mutation probability of genes on each locus of chromosome is equal, say Pm, therefore, mathematical expectation of mutation searching step is一i i - b —a b b- aE (x) = P w = P•—a«2i-1 = P•—a q2,-1)= (b- a) •m m i m 21 -1 m 2 i -1 mi=1 i=1一种新的改进遗传算法及其性能分析摘要:虽然遗传算法以其全局搜索、并行计算、更好的健壮性以及在进化过程中不需要求导而著称,但是它仍然有一定的缺陷,比如收敛速度慢。

免疫算法基本流程 -回复

免疫算法基本流程 -回复

免疫算法基本流程 -回复免疫算法(Immune Algorithm,IA)是仿生学领域的一种元启发式算法,它模仿人类免疫系统的功能,用于解决复杂问题的优化问题。

其基本流程包括问题建模、个体编码、种群初始化、克隆操作、变异操作、选择操作等,接下来本文将从这些方面进一步展开详细描述。

一、问题建模在使用免疫算法解决优化问题之前,需要将问题进行合理的建模。

建模过程主要涉及问题的因素、目标和约束条件等问题,例如在TSP(Traveling Salesman Problem)中,需要定义地图中所有城市之间的距离以及行走路线的长度等因素。

建模完成后,将其转化为适合于免疫算法处理的数学表示形式,这有助于优化算法的精度和效率。

二、个体编码从问题建模后,需要将问题的变量转化为适合免疫算法处理的个体编码,即将问题的解转化成一些序列或数值,这样才能进行算法的操作。

对于不同的问题,需要设计合适的编码方式,例如对于TSP问题,可以将城市序列编码成01字符串等。

三、种群初始化在免疫算法中,需要构建一个种群,种群中的每个个体代表了问题的一个解。

种群初始化是在搜索空间中随机生成一组解,并且保证这些解满足约束条件。

种群大小需要根据问题规模和计算能力来合理安排,一般情况下,种群大小越大,搜索空间越大,但是计算成本也越高。

四、克隆操作在免疫算法中,克隆操作是其中一个重要的基因变异操作。

该操作的目的是产生大量近似于当前最优的个体,增加搜索空间的多样性。

克隆操作的流程如下:1.计算适应度函数值,根据适应度函数值进行排序。

2.选择适应度函数值最优的一部分个体进行克隆操作。

3.对克隆个体进行加密操作,增加其多样性。

5、变异操作变异操作是免疫算法中的一个基本操作,其目的是使部分克隆个体产生和原个体不同的搜索方向,增加搜索空间的变异性。

在变异操作中,采用随机、局部搜索或任意搜索等方法来对某些个体进行改变其参数或某些属性,以期望产生一些新的解。

变异操作的流程如下:1.从克隆群体中随机选择一定数量的个体进行变异操作。

遗传算法(GeneticAlgorithm)..

遗传算法(GeneticAlgorithm)..
问题的一个解 解的编码 编码的元素
被选定的一组解 根据适应函数选择的一组解 以一定的方式由双亲产生后代的过程 编码的某些分量发生变化的过程
遗传算法的基本操作
➢选择(selection):
根据各个个体的适应值,按照一定的规则或方法,从 第t代群体P(t)中选择出一些优良的个体遗传到下一代 群体P(t+1)中。
等到达一定程度时,值0会从整个群体中那个位上消失,然而全局最 优解可能在染色体中那个位上为0。如果搜索范围缩小到实际包含全局 最优解的那部分搜索空间,在那个位上的值0就可能正好是到达全局最 优解所需要的。
2023/10/31
适应函数(Fitness Function)
➢ GA在搜索中不依靠外部信息,仅以适应函数为依据,利 用群体中每个染色体(个体)的适应值来进行搜索。以染 色体适应值的大小来确定该染色体被遗传到下一代群体 中的概率。染色体适应值越大,该染色体被遗传到下一 代的概率也越大;反之,染色体的适应值越小,该染色 体被遗传到下一代的概率也越小。因此适应函数的选取 至关重要,直接影响到GA的收敛速度以及能否找到最优 解。
2023/10/31
如何设计遗传算法
➢如何进行编码? ➢如何产生初始种群? ➢如何定义适应函数? ➢如何进行遗传操作(复制、交叉、变异)? ➢如何产生下一代种群? ➢如何定义停止准则?
2023/10/31
编码(Coding)
表现型空间
基因型空间 = {0,1}L
编码(Coding)
10010001
父代
111111111111
000000000000
交叉点位置
子代
2023/10/31
111100000000 000011111111

智能优化算法英文投稿选类别

智能优化算法英文投稿选类别

智能优化算法英文投稿选类别
智能优化算法的英文投稿在选择类别时,可以考虑以下几个类别:
1. Artificial Intelligence (人工智能):这个类别涵盖了所有形式的人工智能技术,包括但不限于机器学习、深度学习、强化学习、神经网络等。

如果你的智能优化算法是基于某种人工智能技术,那么这个类别可能非常适合。

2. Optimization Methods (优化方法):这个类别主要关注各种优化算法和技术,包括但不限于遗传算法、粒子群优化、模拟退火、蚁群优化等。

如果你的智能优化算法是一种新的优化方法,那么这个类别可能非常适合。

3. Computer Science (计算机科学):这个类别涵盖了计算机科学的各个方面,包括算法设计、数据结构、计算复杂性等。

如果你的智能优化算法是一种新的计算方法或者对现有的计算方法进行了改进,那么这个类别可能非常适合。

4. Engineering (工程):这个类别主要关注实际应用和工程问题,包括但不限于机械工程、航空航天工程、土木工程等。

如果你的智能优化算法是用于解决某个工程问题,那么这个类别可能非常适合。

需要注意的是,选择类别时还需要考虑期刊或会议的投稿要求和规范。

有些期刊或会议可能对稿件的格式、内容、长度等方面有特定的要求,因此在选择类别时需要仔细阅读投稿指南并遵循相关规定。

正确对待算法的作文题目

正确对待算法的作文题目

正确对待算法的作文题目英文回答:When it comes to dealing with algorithms, it is important to approach them with a balanced perspective. On one hand, algorithms have greatly improved our lives by providing efficient solutions to complex problems. For example, search engines like Google use algorithms toquickly deliver relevant search results, saving us time and effort. Algorithms also play a crucial role in various industries, such as finance, healthcare, and transportation, where they help optimize processes and make informed decisions.However, it is equally important to acknowledge the potential drawbacks and ethical concerns associated with algorithms. One major concern is the issue of bias. Algorithms are created by humans and can inadvertentlyreflect the biases and prejudices of their creators. For instance, facial recognition algorithms have been found tohave higher error rates for people with darker skin tones, leading to potential discrimination. Another concern is the lack of transparency and accountability in algorithmic decision-making. When algorithms are used to make important decisions, such as in hiring or loan approvals, it iscrucial to ensure that they are fair, unbiased, and explainable.To address these concerns, it is necessary to have regulations and guidelines in place to govern the development and use of algorithms. Governments and organizations should promote transparency andaccountability by requiring algorithmic systems to be auditable and explainable. Additionally, there should be diversity and inclusivity in the teams developingalgorithms to minimize biases. Regular audits and evaluations of algorithms should be conducted to identify and rectify any biases or errors.Moreover, it is essential to educate the public about algorithms and their impact. Many people are unaware of how algorithms work and the potential consequences of their use.By promoting digital literacy and providing accessible resources, individuals can make informed decisions and actively engage in discussions about algorithmic fairness and ethics.In conclusion, algorithms have become an integral partof our lives, bringing numerous benefits and conveniences. However, we must approach them with caution and address the potential biases and ethical concerns they may pose. By implementing regulations, promoting transparency, and educating the public, we can ensure that algorithms are developed and used in a responsible and fair manner.中文回答:谈到处理算法时,我们需要以平衡的态度来对待它们。

ReliabilityEngineeringandSystemSafety91(2006)992–1007

ReliabilityEngineeringandSystemSafety91(2006)992–1007

Reliability Engineering and System Safety 91(2006)992–1007Multi-objective optimization using genetic algorithms:A tutorialAbdullah Konak a,Ã,David W.Coit b ,Alice E.Smith caInformation Sciences and Technology,Penn State Berks,USA bDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering,Rutgers University cDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering,Auburn UniversityAvailable online 9January 2006AbstractMulti-objective formulations are realistic models for many complex engineering optimization problems.In many real-life problems,objectives under consideration conflict with each other,and optimizing a particular solution with respect to a single objective can result in unacceptable results with respect to the other objectives.A reasonable solution to a multi-objective problem is to investigate a set of solutions,each of which satisfies the objectives at an acceptable level without being dominated by any other solution.In this paper,an overview and tutorial is presented describing genetic algorithms (GA)developed specifically for problems with multiple objectives.They differ primarily from traditional GA by using specialized fitness functions and introducing methods to promote solution diversity.r 2005Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.1.IntroductionThe objective of this paper is present an overview and tutorial of multiple-objective optimization methods using genetic algorithms (GA).For multiple-objective problems,the objectives are generally conflicting,preventing simulta-neous optimization of each objective.Many,or even most,real engineering problems actually do have multiple-objectives,i.e.,minimize cost,maximize performance,maximize reliability,etc.These are difficult but realistic problems.GA are a popular meta-heuristic that is particularly well-suited for this class of problems.Tradi-tional GA are customized to accommodate multi-objective problems by using specialized fitness functions and introducing methods to promote solution diversity.There are two general approaches to multiple-objective optimization.One is to combine the individual objective functions into a single composite function or move all but one objective to the constraint set.In the former case,determination of a single objective is possible with methods such as utility theory,weighted sum method,etc.,but theproblem lies in the proper selection of the weights or utility functions to characterize the decision-maker’s preferences.In practice,it can be very difficult to precisely and accurately select these weights,even for someone familiar with the problem pounding this drawback is that scaling amongst objectives is needed and small perturbations in the weights can sometimes lead to quite different solutions.In the latter case,the problem is that to move objectives to the constraint set,a constraining value must be established for each of these former objectives.This can be rather arbitrary.In both cases,an optimization method would return a single solution rather than a set of solutions that can be examined for trade-offs.For this reason,decision-makers often prefer a set of good solutions considering the multiple objectives.The second general approach is to determine an entire Pareto optimal solution set or a representative subset.A Pareto optimal set is a set of solutions that are nondominated with respect to each other.While moving from one Pareto solution to another,there is always a certain amount of sacrifice in one objective(s)to achieve a certain amount of gain in the other(s).Pareto optimal solution sets are often preferred to single solutions because they can be practical when considering real-life problems/locate/ress0951-8320/$-see front matter r 2005Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.ress.2005.11.018ÃCorresponding author.E-mail address:konak@ (A.Konak).since thefinal solution of the decision-maker is always a trade-off.Pareto optimal sets can be of varied sizes,but the size of the Pareto set usually increases with the increase in the number of objectives.2.Multi-objective optimization formulationConsider a decision-maker who wishes to optimize K objectives such that the objectives are non-commensurable and the decision-maker has no clear preference of the objectives relative to each other.Without loss of generality, all objectives are of the minimization type—a minimization type objective can be converted to a maximization type by multiplying negative one.A minimization multi-objective decision problem with K objectives is defined as follows: Given an n-dimensional decision variable vector x¼{x1,y,x n}in the solution space X,find a vector x* that minimizes a given set of K objective functions z(x*)¼{z1(x*),y,z K(x*)}.The solution space X is gen-erally restricted by a series of constraints,such as g j(x*)¼b j for j¼1,y,m,and bounds on the decision variables.In many real-life problems,objectives under considera-tion conflict with each other.Hence,optimizing x with respect to a single objective often results in unacceptable results with respect to the other objectives.Therefore,a perfect multi-objective solution that simultaneously opti-mizes each objective function is almost impossible.A reasonable solution to a multi-objective problem is to investigate a set of solutions,each of which satisfies the objectives at an acceptable level without being dominated by any other solution.If all objective functions are for minimization,a feasible solution x is said to dominate another feasible solution y (x1y),if and only if,z i(x)p z i(y)for i¼1,y,K and z j(x)o z j(y)for least one objective function j.A solution is said to be Pareto optimal if it is not dominated by any other solution in the solution space.A Pareto optimal solution cannot be improved with respect to any objective without worsening at least one other objective.The set of all feasible non-dominated solutions in X is referred to as the Pareto optimal set,and for a given Pareto optimal set,the corresponding objective function values in the objective space are called the Pareto front.For many problems,the number of Pareto optimal solutions is enormous(perhaps infinite).The ultimate goal of a multi-objective optimization algorithm is to identify solutions in the Pareto optimal set.However,identifying the entire Pareto optimal set, for many multi-objective problems,is practically impos-sible due to its size.In addition,for many problems, especially for combinatorial optimization problems,proof of solution optimality is computationally infeasible.There-fore,a practical approach to multi-objective optimization is to investigate a set of solutions(the best-known Pareto set)that represent the Pareto optimal set as well as possible.With these concerns in mind,a multi-objective optimization approach should achieve the following three conflicting goals[1]:1.The best-known Pareto front should be as close aspossible to the true Pareto front.Ideally,the best-known Pareto set should be a subset of the Pareto optimal set.2.Solutions in the best-known Pareto set should beuniformly distributed and diverse over of the Pareto front in order to provide the decision-maker a true picture of trade-offs.3.The best-known Pareto front should capture the wholespectrum of the Pareto front.This requires investigating solutions at the extreme ends of the objective function space.For a given computational time limit,thefirst goal is best served by focusing(intensifying)the search on a particular region of the Pareto front.On the contrary,the second goal demands the search effort to be uniformly distributed over the Pareto front.The third goal aims at extending the Pareto front at both ends,exploring new extreme solutions.This paper presents common approaches used in multi-objective GA to attain these three conflicting goals while solving a multi-objective optimization problem.3.Genetic algorithmsThe concept of GA was developed by Holland and his colleagues in the1960s and1970s[2].GA are inspired by the evolutionist theory explaining the origin of species.In nature,weak and unfit species within their environment are faced with extinction by natural selection.The strong ones have greater opportunity to pass their genes to future generations via reproduction.In the long run,species carrying the correct combination in their genes become dominant in their population.Sometimes,during the slow process of evolution,random changes may occur in genes. If these changes provide additional advantages in the challenge for survival,new species evolve from the old ones.Unsuccessful changes are eliminated by natural selection.In GA terminology,a solution vector x A X is called an individual or a chromosome.Chromosomes are made of discrete units called genes.Each gene controls one or more features of the chromosome.In the original implementa-tion of GA by Holland,genes are assumed to be binary digits.In later implementations,more varied gene types have been introduced.Normally,a chromosome corre-sponds to a unique solution x in the solution space.This requires a mapping mechanism between the solution space and the chromosomes.This mapping is called an encoding. In fact,GA work on the encoding of a problem,not on the problem itself.GA operate with a collection of chromosomes,called a population.The population is normally randomly initia-lized.As the search evolves,the population includesfitterA.Konak et al./Reliability Engineering and System Safety91(2006)992–1007993andfitter solutions,and eventually it converges,meaning that it is dominated by a single solution.Holland also presented a proof of convergence(the schema theorem)to the global optimum where chromosomes are binary vectors.GA use two operators to generate new solutions from existing ones:crossover and mutation.The crossover operator is the most important operator of GA.In crossover,generally two chromosomes,called parents,are combined together to form new chromosomes,called offspring.The parents are selected among existing chromo-somes in the population with preference towardsfitness so that offspring is expected to inherit good genes which make the parentsfitter.By iteratively applying the crossover operator,genes of good chromosomes are expected to appear more frequently in the population,eventually leading to convergence to an overall good solution.The mutation operator introduces random changes into characteristics of chromosomes.Mutation is generally applied at the gene level.In typical GA implementations, the mutation rate(probability of changing the properties of a gene)is very small and depends on the length of the chromosome.Therefore,the new chromosome produced by mutation will not be very different from the original one.Mutation plays a critical role in GA.As discussed earlier,crossover leads the population to converge by making the chromosomes in the population alike.Muta-tion reintroduces genetic diversity back into the population and assists the search escape from local optima. Reproduction involves selection of chromosomes for the next generation.In the most general case,thefitness of an individual determines the probability of its survival for the next generation.There are different selection procedures in GA depending on how thefitness values are used. Proportional selection,ranking,and tournament selection are the most popular selection procedures.The procedure of a generic GA[3]is given as follows:Step1:Set t¼1.Randomly generate N solutions to form thefirst population,P1.Evaluate thefitness of solutions in P1.Step2:Crossover:Generate an offspring population Q t as follows:2.1.Choose two solutions x and y from P t based onthefitness values.ing a crossover operator,generate offspringand add them to Q t.Step3:Mutation:Mutate each solution x A Q t with a predefined mutation rate.Step4:Fitness assignment:Evaluate and assign afitness value to each solution x A Q t based on its objective function value and infeasibility.Step5:Selection:Select N solutions from Q t based on theirfitness and copy them to P t+1.Step6:If the stopping criterion is satisfied,terminate the search and return to the current population,else,set t¼t+1go to Step2.4.Multi-objective GABeing a population-based approach,GA are well suited to solve multi-objective optimization problems.A generic single-objective GA can be modified tofind a set of multiple non-dominated solutions in a single run.The ability of GA to simultaneously search different regions of a solution space makes it possible tofind a diverse set of solutions for difficult problems with non-convex,discon-tinuous,and multi-modal solutions spaces.The crossover operator of GA may exploit structures of good solutions with respect to different objectives to create new non-dominated solutions in unexplored parts of the Pareto front.In addition,most multi-objective GA do not require the user to prioritize,scale,or weigh objectives.Therefore, GA have been the most popular heuristic approach to multi-objective design and optimization problems.Jones et al.[4]reported that90%of the approaches to multi-objective optimization aimed to approximate the true Pareto front for the underlying problem.A majority of these used a meta-heuristic technique,and70%of all meta-heuristics approaches were based on evolutionary ap-proaches.Thefirst multi-objective GA,called vector evaluated GA (or VEGA),was proposed by Schaffer[5].Afterwards, several multi-objective evolutionary algorithms were devel-oped including Multi-objective Genetic Algorithm (MOGA)[6],Niched Pareto Genetic Algorithm(NPGA) [7],Weight-based Genetic Algorithm(WBGA)[8],Ran-dom Weighted Genetic Algorithm(RWGA)[9],Nondomi-nated Sorting Genetic Algorithm(NSGA)[10],Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm(SPEA)[11],improved SPEA(SPEA2)[12],Pareto-Archived Evolution Strategy (PAES)[13],Pareto Envelope-based Selection Algorithm (PESA)[14],Region-based Selection in Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization(PESA-II)[15],Fast Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm(NSGA-II)[16], Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithm(MEA)[17], Micro-GA[18],Rank-Density Based Genetic Algorithm (RDGA)[19],and Dynamic Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithm(DMOEA)[20].Note that although there are many variations of multi-objective GA in the literature, these cited GA are well-known and credible algorithms that have been used in many applications and their performances were tested in several comparative studies. Several survey papers[1,11,21–27]have been published on evolutionary multi-objective optimization.Coello lists more than2000references in his website[28].Generally, multi-objective GA differ based on theirfitness assign-ment procedure,elitisim,or diversification approaches.In Table1,highlights of the well-known multi-objective with their advantages and disadvantages are given.Most survey papers on multi-objective evolutionary approaches intro-duce and compare different algorithms.This paper takes a different course and focuses on important issues while designing a multi-objective GA and describes common techniques used in multi-objective GA to attain the threeA.Konak et al./Reliability Engineering and System Safety91(2006)992–1007 994goals in multi-objective optimization.This approach is also taken in the survey paper by Zitzler et al.[1].However,the discussion in this paper is aimed at introducing the components of multi-objective GA to researchers and practitioners without a background on the multi-objective GA.It is also import to note that although several of the state-of-the-art algorithms exist as cited above,many researchers that applied multi-objective GA to their problems have preferred to design their own customized algorithms by adapting strategies from various multi-objective GA.This observation is another motivation for introducing the components of multi-objective GA rather than focusing on several algorithms.However,the pseudo-code for some of the well-known multi-objective GA are also provided in order to demonstrate how these proce-dures are incorporated within a multi-objective GA.Table1A list of well-known multi-objective GAAlgorithm Fitness assignment Diversity mechanism Elitism ExternalpopulationAdvantages DisadvantagesVEGA[5]Each subpopulation isevaluated with respectto a differentobjective No No No First MOGAStraightforwardimplementationTend converge to theextreme of each objectiveMOGA[6]Pareto ranking Fitness sharing byniching No No Simple extension of singleobjective GAUsually slowconvergenceProblems related to nichesize parameterWBGA[8]Weighted average ofnormalized objectives Niching No No Simple extension of singleobjective GADifficulties in nonconvexobjective function space Predefined weightsNPGA[7]Nofitnessassignment,tournament selection Niche count as tie-breaker in tournamentselectionNo No Very simple selectionprocess with tournamentselectionProblems related to nichesize parameterExtra parameter fortournament selectionRWGA[9]Weighted average ofnormalized objectives Randomly assignedweightsYes Yes Efficient and easyimplementDifficulties in nonconvexobjective function spacePESA[14]Nofitness assignment Cell-based density Pure elitist Yes Easy to implement Performance depends oncell sizesComputationally efficientPrior information neededabout objective spacePAES[29]Pareto dominance isused to replace aparent if offspringdominates Cell-based density astie breaker betweenoffspring and parentYes Yes Random mutation hill-climbing strategyNot a population basedapproachEasy to implement Performance depends oncell sizesComputationally efficientNSGA[10]Ranking based onnon-dominationsorting Fitness sharing bynichingNo No Fast convergence Problems related to nichesize parameterNSGA-II[30]Ranking based onnon-dominationsorting Crowding distance Yes No Single parameter(N)Crowding distance worksin objective space onlyWell testedEfficientSPEA[11]Raking based on theexternal archive ofnon-dominatedsolutions Clustering to truncateexternal populationYes Yes Well tested Complex clusteringalgorithmNo parameter forclusteringSPEA-2[12]Strength ofdominators Density based on thek-th nearest neighborYes Yes Improved SPEA Computationallyexpensivefitness anddensity calculationMake sure extreme pointsare preservedRDGA[19]The problem reducedto bi-objectiveproblem with solutionrank and density asobjectives Forbidden region cell-based densityYes Yes Dynamic cell update More difficult toimplement than othersRobust with respect to thenumber of objectivesDMOEA[20]Cell-based ranking Adaptive cell-baseddensity Yes(implicitly)No Includes efficienttechniques to update celldensitiesMore difficult toimplement than othersAdaptive approaches toset GA parametersA.Konak et al./Reliability Engineering and System Safety91(2006)992–10079955.Design issues and components of multi-objective GA 5.1.Fitness functions5.1.1.Weighted sum approachesThe classical approach to solve a multi-objective optimization problem is to assign a weight w i to each normalized objective function z 0i ðx Þso that the problem is converted to a single objective problem with a scalar objective function as follows:min z ¼w 1z 01ðx Þþw 2z 02ðx ÞþÁÁÁþw k z 0k ðx Þ,(1)where z 0i ðx Þis the normalized objective function z i (x )and P w i ¼1.This approach is called the priori approach since the user is expected to provide the weights.Solving a problem with the objective function (1)for a given weight vector w ¼{w 1,w 2,y ,w k }yields a single solution,and if multiple solutions are desired,the problem must be solved multiple times with different weight combinations.The main difficulty with this approach is selecting a weight vector for each run.To automate this process;Hajela and Lin [8]proposed the WBGA for multi-objective optimization (WBGA-MO)in the WBGA-MO,each solution x i in the population uses a different weight vector w i ¼{w 1,w 2,y ,w k }in the calculation of the summed objective function (1).The weight vector w i is embedded within the chromosome of solution x i .Therefore,multiple solutions can be simulta-neously searched in a single run.In addition,weight vectors can be adjusted to promote diversity of the population.Other researchers [9,31]have proposed a MOGA based on a weighted sum of multiple objective functions where a normalized weight vector w i is randomly generated for each solution x i during the selection phase at each generation.This approach aims to stipulate multiple search directions in a single run without using additional parameters.The general procedure of the RWGA using random weights is given as follows [31]:Procedure RWGA:E ¼external archive to store non-dominated solutions found during the search so far;n E ¼number of elitist solutions immigrating from E to P in each generation.Step 1:Generate a random population.Step 2:Assign a fitness value to each solution x A P t by performing the following steps:Step 2.1:Generate a random number u k in [0,1]for each objective k ,k ¼1,y ,K.Step 2.2:Calculate the random weight of each objective k as w k ¼ð1=u k ÞP K i ¼1u i .Step 2.3:Calculate the fitness of the solution as f ðx Þ¼P K k ¼1w k z k ðx Þ.Step 3:Calculate the selection probability of each solutionx A P t as follows:p ðx Þ¼ðf ðx ÞÀf min ÞÀ1P y 2P t ðf ðy ÞÀf minÞwhere f min ¼min f f ðx Þj x 2P t g .Step 4:Select parents using the selection probabilities calculated in Step 3.Apply crossover on the selected parent pairs to create N offspring.Mutate offspring with a predefined mutation rate.Copy all offspring to P t +1.Update E if necessary.Step 5:Randomly remove n E solutions from P t +1and add the same number of solutions from E to P t +1.Step 6:If the stopping condition is not satisfied,set t ¼t þ1and go to Step 2.Otherwise,return to E .The main advantage of the weighted sum approach is a straightforward implementation.Since a single objective is used in fitness assignment,a single objective GA can be used with minimum modifications.In addition,this approach is computationally efficient.The main disadvan-tage of this approach is that not all Pareto-optimal solutions can be investigated when the true Pareto front is non-convex.Therefore,multi-objective GA based on the weighed sum approach have difficulty in finding solutions uniformly distributed over a non-convex trade-off surface [1].5.1.2.Altering objective functionsAs mentioned earlier,VEGA [5]is the first GA used to approximate the Pareto-optimal set by a set of non-dominated solutions.In VEGA,population P t is randomly divided into K equal sized sub-populations;P 1,P 2,y ,P K .Then,each solution in subpopulation P i is assigned a fitness value based on objective function z i .Solutions are selected from these subpopulations using proportional selection for crossover and mutation.Crossover and mutation are performed on the new population in the same way as for a single objective GA.Procedure VEGA:N S ¼subpopulation size (N S ¼N =K )Step 1:Start with a random initial population P 0.Set t ¼0.Step 2:If the stopping criterion is satisfied,return P t .Step 3:Randomly sort population P t .Step 4:For each objective k ,k ¼1,y K ,perform the following steps:Step 4.1:For i ¼1þðk 21ÞN S ;...;kN S ,assign fit-ness value f ðx i Þ¼z k ðx i Þto the i th solution in the sorted population.Step 4.2:Based on the fitness values assigned in Step 4.1,select N S solutions between the (1+(k À1)N S )th and (kN S )th solutions of the sorted population to create subpopulation P k .Step 5:Combine all subpopulations P 1,y ,P k and apply crossover and mutation on the combined population to create P t +1of size N .Set t ¼t þ1,go to Step 2.A similar approach to VEGA is to use only a single objective function which is randomly determined each time in the selection phase [32].The main advantage of the alternating objectives approach is easy to implement andA.Konak et al./Reliability Engineering and System Safety 91(2006)992–1007996computationally as efficient as a single-objective GA.In fact,this approach is a straightforward extension of a single objective GA to solve multi-objective problems.The major drawback of objective switching is that the popula-tion tends to converge to solutions which are superior in one objective,but poor at others.5.1.3.Pareto-ranking approachesPareto-ranking approaches explicitly utilize the concept of Pareto dominance in evaluatingfitness or assigning selection probability to solutions.The population is ranked according to a dominance rule,and then each solution is assigned afitness value based on its rank in the population, not its actual objective function value.Note that herein all objectives are assumed to be minimized.Therefore,a lower rank corresponds to a better solution in the following discussions.Thefirst Pareto ranking technique was proposed by Goldberg[3]as follows:Step1:Set i¼1and TP¼P.Step2:Identify non-dominated solutions in TP and assigned them set to F i.Step3:Set TP¼TPF i.If TP¼+go to Step4,else set i¼iþ1and go to Step2.Step4:For every solution x A P at generation t,assign rank r1ðx;tÞ¼i if x A F i.In the procedure above,F1,F2,y are called non-dominated fronts,and F1is the Pareto front of population P.NSGA[10]also classifies the population into non-dominated fronts using an algorithm similar to that given above.Then a dummyfitness value is assigned to each front using afitness sharing function such that the worst fitness value assigned to F i is better than the bestfitness value assigned to F i+1.NSGA-II[16],a more efficient algorithm,named the fast non-dominated-sort algorithm, was developed to form non-dominated fronts.Fonseca and Fleming[6]used a slightly different rank assignment approach than the ranking based on non-dominated-fronts as follows:r2ðx;tÞ¼1þnqðx;tÞ;(2) where nq(x,t)is the number of solutions dominating solution x at generation t.This ranking method penalizes solutions located in the regions of the objective function space which are dominated(covered)by densely populated sections of the Pareto front.For example,in Fig.1b solution i is dominated by solutions c,d and e.Therefore,it is assigned a rank of4although it is in the same front with solutions f,g and h which are dominated by only a single solution.SPEA[11]uses a ranking procedure to assign better fitness values to non-dominated solutions at underrepre-sented regions of the objective space.In SPEA,an external list E of afixed size stores non-dominated solutions that have been investigated thus far during the search.For each solution y A E,a strength value is defined assðy;tÞ¼npðy;tÞN Pþ1,where npðy;tÞis the number solutions that y dominates in P.The rank r(y,t)of a solution y A E is assigned as r3ðy;tÞ¼sðy;tÞand the rank of a solution x A P is calculated asr3ðx;tÞ¼1þXy2E;y1xsðy;tÞ.Fig.1c illustrates an example of the SPEA ranking method.In the former two methods,all non-dominated solutions are assigned a rank of1.This method,however, favors solution a(in thefigure)over the other non-dominated solutions since it covers the least number of solutions in the objective function space.Therefore,a wide, uniformly distributed set of non-dominated solutions is encouraged.Accumulated ranking density strategy[19]also aims to penalize redundancy in the population due to overrepre-sentation.This ranking method is given asr4ðx;tÞ¼1þXy2P;y1xrðy;tÞ.To calculate the rank of a solution x,the rank of the solutions dominating this solution must be calculatedfirst. Fig.1d shows an example of this ranking method(based on r2).Using ranking method r4,solutions i,l and n are ranked higher than their counterparts at the same non-dominated front since the portion of the trade-off surface covering them is crowded by three nearby solutions c,d and e. Although some of the ranking approaches described in this section can be used directly to assignfitness values to individual solutions,they are usually combined with variousfitness sharing techniques to achieve the second goal in multi-objective optimization,finding a diverse and uniform Pareto front.5.2.Diversity:fitness assignment,fitness sharing,and nichingMaintaining a diverse population is an important consideration in multi-objective GA to obtain solutions uniformly distributed over the Pareto front.Without taking preventive measures,the population tends to form relatively few clusters in multi-objective GA.This phenom-enon is called genetic drift,and several approaches have been devised to prevent genetic drift as follows.5.2.1.Fitness sharingFitness sharing encourages the search in unexplored sections of a Pareto front by artificially reducingfitness of solutions in densely populated areas.To achieve this goal, densely populated areas are identified and a penaltyA.Konak et al./Reliability Engineering and System Safety91(2006)992–1007997。

levenshtein 相似度算法实现 -回复

levenshtein 相似度算法实现 -回复

levenshtein 相似度算法实现-回复什么是Levenshtein相似度算法?Levenshtein相似度算法,也称为编辑距离算法,是用于衡量两个字符串之间差异程度的一种方法。

它通过计算将一个字符串转换为另一个字符串所需的最少操作次数来确定相似度。

这种算法最早由俄罗斯科学家Vladimir Levenshtein于1965年提出,因此得名。

它对于自然语言处理、拼写检查、语音识别等领域,具有广泛的应用价值。

Levenshtein 相似度算法主要包括三种基本操作,分别是插入、删除和替换。

插入操作指的是在一个字符串中插入一个字符,使其与另一个字符串匹配;删除操作指的是从一个字符串中删除一个字符,使其与另一个字符串匹配;替换操作指的是将一个字符串中的字符替换为另一个字符,使其与另一个字符串匹配。

接下来,我们将一步一步地回答如何实现这种算法。

第一步是确定两个字符串,我们假设这两个字符串分别是A和B。

第二步是创建一个二维数组DP,大小为(A的长度+1)乘以(B的长度+1)。

这个数组将用于存储每个子问题的解,并且有助于计算整体问题的解。

第三步是初始化DP数组。

我们需要将DP数组的第一行和第一列填充为从0到A的长度和从0到B的长度的整数。

第四步是开始填充DP数组。

我们可以使用一个两层嵌套的循环来遍历数组的每个元素,并计算编辑距离。

对于数组中的每个元素,我们可以使用以下公式来计算编辑距离:if A[i-1] == B[j-1]:DP[i][j] = DP[i-1][j-1]else:DP[i][j] = min(DP[i-1][j] + 1, DP[i][j-1] + 1, DP[i-1][j-1] + 1)其中,A[i-1]表示A字符串的第i个字符,B[j-1]表示B字符串的第j个字符。

在这个公式中,如果A的第i个字符和B的第j个字符相同,则编辑距离与上一个子问题的编辑距离相等。

如果它们不相同,则编辑距离等于上一个子问题的编辑距离加上1,或者等于上一个子问题的插入、删除或替换操作的编辑距离。

noi 遗传算法

noi 遗传算法

noi 遗传算法
遗传算法(Genetic Algorithm)是一种基于进化思想的优化算法,主要用于解决搜索和优化问题。

其基本思想是通过模拟生物进化的过程,采用基因、染色体等概念来表示问题的解,并通过自然选择和遗传操作(交叉和变异)等过程来不断演化和改进解的质量。

遗传算法的工作流程一般包括以下步骤:
1. 初始化种群:随机生成一组初始解(染色体)作为种群。

2. 适应度评估:根据问题的具体要求,计算每个个体(染色体)的适应度,即解的优劣程度。

3. 选择操作:根据适应度选择一定数量的个体作为优良个体,进入下一代。

4. 交叉操作:对优良个体进行染色体交叉,生成新的个体。

5. 变异操作:对新生成的个体进行染色体变异,引入多样性。

6. 判断终止条件:判断是否满足终止条件,如达到最大迭代次数或解符合一定的准确度要求。

7. 返回最优解:输出找到的最优解。

遗传算法的优点包括能够自适应搜索空间、全局搜索能力强、并行计算能力好等,适用于复杂问题和无法通过传统数学方法解决的优化问题。

但同时也存在不收敛、易陷入局部最优解等问题,在实际应用中需要根据具体情况进行参数调节和改进。

tarantula算法

tarantula算法

Tarantula 算法是一种基于遗传算法的路径规划方法,适用于机器人和自主车辆在不同环境中的导航和避障。

Tarantula 算法原名Spiderbot,由英国牛津大学机器人实验室开发,其核心思想是将遗传算法与机器人的实际运动学模型相结合,使机器人能够在复杂环境中自主导航。

Tarantula 算法的主要步骤如下:
1. 初始化种群:创建一群具有随机运动策略的机器人,每个机器人的运动策略表示为一条路径。

2. 评估适应度:根据机器人在环境中的碰撞情况和目标到达情况,计算每个机器人路径的适应度值。

适应度值越高,表示路径越好。

3. 选择操作:采用轮盘赌选择法,从当前种群中选择具有较高适应度值的机器人,生成新一代种群。

4. 交叉操作:在新一代种群中,随机选择两个机器人,将它们的路径进行交叉,生成新的路径。

交叉点可以是随机选择的,也可以是基于一定规则的。

5. 变异操作:在新生成的路径中,引入一定程度的随机变异,以保持种群的多样性。

6. 更新种群:根据新一代种群的路径质量和适应度值,更新原始种群。

7. 终止条件:当满足终止条件(如达到最大迭代次数或找到满足要求的路径)时,算法结束。

Tarantula 算法通过不断优化机器人的运动路径,使其在避开障碍物的同时,尽量靠近目标。

与其他路径规划算法相比,Tarantula 算法具有较好的全局搜索能力和适应性,适用于多种环境和场景。

朱利安赫胥黎《自然界的平衡》(中英文互译)

朱利安赫胥黎《自然界的平衡》(中英文互译)

朱利安·赫胥黎《自然界的平衡》(中英文互译)朱利安·赫胥黎(Sir Julian Sorell Huxley, 1887—1975),英国生物学家、作家、人道主义者,提倡自然选择。

他曾担任动物学社会伦敦书记(1935年至1942年)、第一届联合国教育科学文化组织首长(1946年至1948年),亦是世界自然基金会创始成员之一。

The Balance of Nature自然界的平衡The balance of nature is a very elaborate and very delicate system of checks and counterchecks, it is continually being altered as climates change, as new organisms evolve, as animals or plants permeate to new areas. But the alterations have in the past, for the most part, been slow, whereas with the arrival of civilized man, their speed has been multiplied manyfold: from the evolutionary time-scale, where change is measured by periods of ten or a hundred thousand years, they have been transferred to the human time-scale in which centuries and even decades count.自然界的平衡是一种十分精密复杂而又敏感脆弱的抑制与反抑制体系,它总是随着气候条件的变化,随着新的生物体的形成,随着动植物蔓延入新的地区而持续不断地变化着。

引证法的人工智能作文

引证法的人工智能作文

引证法的人工智能作文英文回答:Paraphrasing is a fundamental aspect of artificial intelligence (AI) writing, allowing AI models to generate unique and coherent content based on existing information. By analyzing the source text and expressing its ideas in a different wording, paraphrasing tools help preserve the original meaning while reducing redundancy and plagiarism.There are numerous approaches to paraphrasing in AI writing, including:Rule-based methods: These methods use a set of predefined rules to identify and replace words or phrases in the source text.Statistical methods: These methods utilize statistical models to learn the relationship between words and phrases, allowing for more nuanced paraphrasing.Neural network methods: These methods leverage neural networks to capture the semantic meaning of the source text and generate paraphrased versions that maintain theoriginal intent.Paraphrasing plays a significant role in various AI applications, such as:Text summarization: Paraphrasing helps condense long texts into concise summaries while retaining the key points.Machine translation: Paraphrasing enables AI models to translate texts into different languages by re-expressing the ideas in the target language.Content generation: Paraphrasing tools can generatenew content by combining ideas from multiple sources, effectively preventing plagiarism.中文回答:引用法在人工智能写作中的应用。

TheVisualCompute...

TheVisualCompute...

TheVisualCompute...The Visual Computer manuscript No.(will be inserted by the editor)1IntroductionGiven two geometric models,one source?A and one target?B,shape metamorphosis generates a sequence2Related WorkAs described previously,most existing3D morphing al-gorithms generally fall into two categories:surface-based approaches and volume-based approaches.Besides these two categories,Turk and O’Brien[26]perform shape transformation between3D shapes by solving a4D in-terpolation problem.Bao et al.[3]present a physically based morphing method via dynamic meshless simula-tion on point-sampled surfaces.Surface-based approaches are usually used for mor-phing3D polygonal meshes,where the correspondence problem and the path[27]problem are believed to be the two main di?culties for mesh morphing methods. The correspondence problem means to?nd a good map-ping(correspondence)between pairs of locations on the boundaries of two meshes.The path problem is to create smooth paths between corresponding vertices of the two meshes,such that no self-intersections happen in the in-termediate meshes.Numerous surface-based approaches have been proposed to deal with these two problems.The readers are referred to[1]for more details.Volume-based approaches do not su?er from these problems[17].They deal deal with sampled or volumet-ric representations of the objects,where the objects are described as(zero)level sets of functions de?ned in the whole3D space.Although it seems that any kind of con-tinuous interpolation between the functions de?ning the source object and the target object will at least pro-3T-spline Level Sets for MetamorphosisIn this section,we give the de?nition of T-spline level sets,and describe how to(approximately)convert the givenobjects(e.g.mesh surfaces)into T-spline level sets. Then we discuss the evolution process of T-spline level sets,in order to transform the shape of the source object ?A into that of the target shape?B.We assume?A and ?B are given by triangular meshes,although other kinds of representations can also be handled by our method.3.1De?nition of T-spline level setsT-splines[24]are generalizations of tensor product B-splines.We now introduce T-spline level sets in3D.Let f(x,y,z)be a trivariate T-spline function de?ned over some domain D,f(x,y,z)= n i=1c i B i(x,y,z)N0N0j=1ω(x j)(f(x j)?d A(x j))2,(4)where x j,j=1,...,N0(N0>>n)is a sequence of sampling points,which are uniformly distributed in the T-spline function domain D.V(D)is the volume of the domain D.In our case,the function f has the form f(x)= b(x)?c,hence the function E is a non-negative de?nite quadratic function of the unknown T-spline control co-e?cients c.The solution c is found by solving a sparse linear system of equations,?E=0,and the initial T-spline level set L0is obtained.If the accuracy of the approximation is not su?cient, a better L0can be found by using more degrees of free-dom(T-spline control coe?cients)and applying the’?-nal re?nement’step[29].The same strategy can be also used for the approximation of the target object after the evolution of T-spline level sets stops.3.3Metamorphosis of T-spline level setsSince the T-mesh is?xed during the morphing process, the T-spline level set function can be written as f(x,τ)=b(x)?c(τ),(5) with the time variableτ.Consider the evolution process ˙x=v(x,τ)n,x∈Γ(f),(6) where the dot of˙x means the time derivative,andv is a scalar-valued speed function along the normal direction n=?f/|?f|ofΓ.In[29],we have shown that this kind of T-spline level sets evolution can be formulated as a least squares problem,where a distance?eld constraint is incorporated to avoid additional branches and singu-larities without having to use re-initialization steps.An extended version of this paper is available as a technical report on the webpage[28].There are a number of choices of the speed function v for the metamorphosis from?A to?B.In order to avoid numerical di? culties and to avoid discontinuities in the solution,v should be continuous.Furthermore,v should carry information about the shape of the target into3D so that shapes tend to”look like”the target as they get nearer.Breen and Whitaker[6]suggest that a natural choice of v is the signed distance transform of the target surface?B or some monotonic function thereof,i.e., v(x)=g(d B(x)),g(0)=0and g′(x)>0,(7) where d B is the signed distance function to the target object?B.The source object will shrink in those areas where it is outside the target object and will expand in those areas inside the target object.It is also proved[6] that if the initial object(L0)and the target object over-lap,the?nal solution of the metamorphosis will be iden-tical to the target.However,direct use of d B as the speed function may cause additional topology changes,which is undesired for a nice morphing process.Figure2shows a morphing example when v(x)=d B(x),where the source object (”?”shape)and the target object(”?”shape)have the same topology(genus0).The morphing sequence in Fig-ure2demonstrates that the”?”shape is?rst split into two components,then one component is vanished and the other component is transformed into the?nal”?”shape.This undesirable artifact is a typical problem for Breen and Whitaker’s method[6]when the source object4Algorithm and ImplementationThis section describes the whole algorithm of3D shape metamorphosis based on the proposed T-spline level set models.The algorithm takes two triangular meshes(the source object?A and the target object?B)and the morphing step size h as input,and produces a sequence of in-between objects(represented by T-spline level sets or triangular meshes)as output.4.1Outline of the AlgorithmThe presented algorithm can be divided into three stages: initialization,evolution,and post-processing.Figure4 shows the?ow chart of our algorithm.In the initialization stage(stage1),the source object ?A is aligned with the target object?B such that the5Experimental Results and DiscussionIn this section,we present some examples to demonstrate and discuss the e?ectiveness of our method.The given source objects and target objects are aligned and nor-malized within a cubic domain D=[?1,1]×[?1,1]×[?1,1].The experiments are run on a PC with AMD Opteron(tm)2.20GHz CPU and3.25G RAM.Please note that all the presented examples are generated fully auto-matically without any user interaction,although interac-tive controls are also possible in the developed software.5.1ExamplesExample1:A bunny morphing into a petal torus.In the ?rst example(see Figure1),the source object(a bunny) is deforming into the target(a petal torus).The T-spline control grid is constructed with2449control coe?cients and shown in(a).The morphing sequence is shown be-tween(b)and(f),where the topology of the objects adaptively changes from genus-0to genus-1.Since the bunny and the petal torus are appropriately overlapped6Conclusions and Future WorkWe have introduced a method for3D shape metamor-phosis based on the evolution of T-spline level sets.The T-spline representation of the level set function is sparse and piecewise rational,the distribution of T-spline con-trol coe?cients can be made adaptive to the geometry of the objects to be morphed.We have also shown that the morphing process of T-spline level sets can be formulated as least squares problems.A fully automatic algorithm is developed to produce metamorphosis between shapes of any topology.For the mesh-based morphing methods,the corre-spondence problem is di?cult[16],especially for two ob-jects with di?erent genus[18].However,this correspon-dence does provide a powerful way for the user to de?ne a desired morphingprocess[14].Since the volume-based morphing methods are parametrization–free,on the one hand they can easily handle complex topology changes, but on the other hand they have problems to(dynami-cally)maintain the correspondence of features betweenReferences1.Alexa,M.:Recent advances in mesh /doc/963407ffc8d376eeaeaa3101.html -puter Graphics forum21(2),173–197(2002)2.Bao,H.,Peng,Q.:Interactive3d /doc/963407ffc8d376eeaeaa3101.html put.Graph.Forum17(3),23–30(1998)3.Bao,Y.,Guo,X.,Qin,H.:Physically based morphingof point-sampled surfaces:Animating geometrical /doc/963407ffc8d376eeaeaa3101.htmlput.Animat.Virtual Worlds16(3-4),509–518 (2005)4.Beier,T.,Neely,S.:Feature-based image metamorphosis.In:Proc.SIGGRAPH’92,pp.35–42(1992)5.Botsch,M.,Bommes,D.,Kobbelt,L.:E?cient linear sys-tem solvers for mesh processing.In:R.M.et al.(ed.) Mathematics of Surfaces XI,LNCS,vol.3604,pp.62–83. Springer,Berlin(2005)6.Breen,D.E.,Whitaker,R.T.:A level-set approach forthe metamorphosis of solid models.IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics7(2),173–192 (2001) 7.Chen,M.,Jones,M.W.,Townsend,P.:Volume distortionand morphing using disk?/doc/963407ffc8d376eeaeaa3101.html puters and Graphics 20(4),567–575(1996)8.Cohen-Or, D.,Solomovic, A.,Levin, D.:Three-dimensional distance?eld metamorphosis.ACM Trans.Graph.17(2),116–141(1998)9.Galin,E.,Akkouche,S.:Blob metamorphosis based onMinkowski /doc/963407ffc8d376eeaeaa3101.html puter Graphics Forum(Proc.Eu-rographics’96)15(3),143–152(1996)10.Hartmann,E.:A marching method for the triangulationof surfaces.The Visual Computer14(3),95–108(1998) 11.He,T.,Wang,S.,Kaufman,A.:Wavelet-based volume morphing.In:Proc.VIS’94,pp.85–92(1994)12.Hughes,J.F.:Scheduled Fourier volume morphing.In:Proc.SIGGRAPH’92,pp.43–46(1992)13.Jin,X.,Liu,S.,Wang,C.L.,Feng,J.,Sun,H.:Blob-basedliquid morphing.Journal of Visualization and Computer Animation16(3-4),391–403(2005)14.Kanai,T.,Suzuki,H.,Kimura,F.:Metamorphosis of ar-bitrary triangular meshes.IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications20(2),62–75(2000)15.Kaul,A.,Rossignac,J.:Solid-interpolating deformations:construction and animation of PIPS.In:Proc.Euro-graphics’91,pp.493–505(1991)16.Kraevoy,V.,She?er, A.:Cross-parameterization andcompatible remeshing of3d models.ACM Trans.Graph.(Proc.SIGGRAPH’04)23(3),861–869(2004)/doc/963407ffc8d376eeaeaa3101.html zarus,F.,Verroust,A.:Three-dimensional metamor-phosis:a survey.The Visual Computer14(8-9),373–389 (1998)18.Lee,T.Y.,Yao,C.Y.,Chu,H.K.,Tai,M.J.,Chen,C.C.:Generating genus-n-to-m mesh morphing using spheri-cal parameterization.Journal of Visualization and Com-puter Animation17(3-4),433–443(2006)19.Lerios,A.,Gar?nkle,C.D.,Levoy,M.:Feature-based vol-ume metamorphosis.In:Proc.SIGGRAPH’95,pp.449–456(1995)20.Nieda,T.,Pasko,A.,Kunii,T.L.:Detection and classi?-cation of topological evolution for linear metamorphosis.The Visual Computer22(5),346–356(2006)21.Pasko,A.,Adzhiev,V.,Sourin,A.,Savchenko,V.:Func-tion representation in geometric modeling:concepts,im-plementation and applications.The Visual Computer 11(8),429–446(1995)22.Payne,B.,Toga,A.:Distance?eld manipulation of sur-face models.IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 12(1),65–71(1992)23.Rossignac,J.,Kaul,A.:AGRELS and BIBs:metamor-phosis as a B′e zier curve in the space of polyhedra.In: Proc.Eurographics’94,pp.179–184(1994)24.Sederberg,T.W.,Zheng,J.,Bakenov,A.,Nasri,A.:T-splines and T-NURCCs.ACM Transactions on Graphics 22(3),477–484(2003)25.Shoemake,K.:Animating rotation with quaternioncurves.In:Proc.SIGGRAPH’85,pp.245–254(1985) 26.Turk,G.,O’Brien,J.F.:Shape transformation using vari-ational implicit functions.In:Proc.SIGGRAPH’99,pp.335–342(1999)27.Yan,H.B.,Hu,S.M.,Martin,R.:3d morphing usingstrain?eld interpolation.Journal of Computer Science and Technology22(1),147–155(2007)28.Yang,H.,Fuchs,M.,J¨u ttler,B.,Scherzer,O.:Evolutionof T-spline level sets with distance?eld constraints for geometry reconstruction and image segmentation.Tech-nical Report01,http://www.ig.jku.at(2005)29.Yang,H.,Fuchs,M.,J¨u ttler,B.,Scherzer,O.:Evolutionof T-spline level sets with distance?eld constraints for geometry reconstruction and image segmentation.In:Proc.SMI’06,pp.247–252(2006)HUAPING YANG receivedthe BE(1998)degree in hy-draulic engineering and thePhD(2004)degree in computerscience from Tsinghua Univer-sity,China.In2004,he did aone-year postdoc in the com-puter graphics group at theUniversity of Hong Kong.In2005,he starts a postdoc atJKU Linz,Austria,in the?eldof applied geometry,funded bya Marie Curie incoming in-ternational fellowship.His re-search interests include ge-ometric modeling,computergraphics,and scienti?c visual-ization.BERT JUETTLER is pro-fessor of Mathematics at Jo-hannes Kepler University ofLinz,Austria.He did his PhDstudies(1992-94)at DarmstadtUniversity of Technology un-der the supervision of the lateProfessor Josef Hoschek.Hisresearch interests include var-ious branches of applied geom-etry,such as Computer AidedGeometric Design,Kinemat-ics and Robotics.Bert Juet-tler is member of the EditorialBoards of Computer Aided Ge-ometric Design(Elsevier)andthe Int.J.of Shape Modeling (World Scienti?c)and serves on the program committees of various international conference(e.g.,the SIAM conference on Geometric Design and Computing2007).。

generative计算机术语

generative计算机术语

generative计算机术语"Generative"(生成式)是计算机领域中的一个术语,通常用于描述一类算法或模型,其目标是生成新的数据,如图像、文本、音频等,而不仅仅是从已有数据中学习。

以下是一些与"Generative"相关的计算机术语:Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs): 生成对抗网络,是一种机器学习模型,包含生成器和判别器,通过对抗过程生成逼真的数据。

Generative Model: 生成模型,是一种学习数据分布并能够生成类似数据的模型。

除了GANs,其他生成模型还包括变分自动编码器(Variational Autoencoders,VAEs)等。

Generative Programming: 生成式编程,是一种软件开发方法,通过高层次的抽象和模板生成代码,提高开发效率。

Generative Design: 生成式设计,是一种利用算法和计算机生成设计方案的方法,常见于建筑、工程和产品设计领域。

Generative Art: 生成艺术,是利用计算机算法和程序生成艺术作品的创作方法。

Generative Language Models: 生成式语言模型,是一类能够生成自然语言文本的模型,如OpenAI 的GPT(Generative Pre-trained Transformer)系列。

Generative Sequences: 生成式序列,指能够生成序列数据(如时间序列、音乐序列等)的模型或算法。

Generative Synthesis: 生成合成,是一种通过算法和计算机生成音频、图像或视频的方法,常见于音乐和图形设计领域。

这些术语都涉及到通过计算机生成新的数据或设计,为创造性和自动化的应用提供了强大的工具和技术。

2018:算法异化的焦虑

2018:算法异化的焦虑

2018:算法异化的焦虑以⾊列耶路撒冷希伯来⼤学的尤⽡尔·赫拉利教授的《未来简史》与其《⼈类简史》⼀样都受到了⼴泛的关注。

这位犹太青年才俊把历史写的像⼀部科技发展的哲学探讨⼀样,不和你按部就班的讲历史史实,⽽是以⼈类历史的变迁为背景,探讨了这种变迁背后的⼒量。

他的⽂笔幽默,故事⽣动,⽽且看来学识渊博,读来引⼈⼊胜。

赫拉利洋洋洒洒近六七⼗万字的宏论,似乎就解释了⼀个可怕的⼒量——算法。

按照他的论述,⼀切皆算法。

⼈的进化也不例外。

在他的笔下,⼈的进化史⼏乎就是⼀部演算⽅法和技术的演变史。

⼈类从掌握最简单的算术开始,⼀步步让算法为⾃⼰服务,直⾄发明了计算机后,算法开始了程序化之路,也开启了⼈类的异化之路。

算法越来越强⼤,看起来对⼈类的帮助也越来越⼤,但是似乎对⼈类的威胁也越来越⼤。

⼀旦算法完全独⽴发展了,也就是说⼈⼯智能完全可以像⼈类⼀样⾃我学习了,奇点就出现了。

奇点在哪⾥,谁也不知道,但是按照现在的研发步伐,可以预见的是奇点已经不远了。

赫拉利预测,⼈类将会发展到神⼈统治的世纪,⽽且已经为期不远。

这个神⼈,就是掌握了算法的社会精英。

他说,“随着算法将⼈类挤出就业市场,财富和权⼒可能会集中在拥有极⼤算法的极少数精英⼿中,造成前所未有的社会及政治不平等”。

(《未来简史》p292)他甚⾄预测,算法⾃⼰也可能成为所有⼈,即如同现在的企业法⼈⼀样。

2014年,⾹港的⼀家创投公司Deep KnowledgeVentures(DKV)任命⼀套算法为董事会成员,这套算法可以与其他董事⼀样具有投票权。

事实上,他的票对改公司的投资产⽣了决定性的影响。

尽管我们⽬前还没有⽅法来验证赫拉利教授的说法,但是AlphaGo战胜中国围棋⾼⼿柯洁的对局则的的确确震惊了全世界。

因为围棋是⼈们认为的最富有学习创意的智⼒活动,⼀般认为这并不在⼈⼯智能可以处理的范围之内。

按照AlphaGo开发者的说法,这个⼈⼯智能载体的算法⽔平还在快速提升。

云南-人工智能导论(07844)复习资料

云南-人工智能导论(07844)复习资料

人工智能导论(07844)复习资料一、单项选择题(本大题共**小题,每小题2分,共**分)1.现在的科技十分发达,警察破案大多数是通过指纹系统来辨认真凶,这是运用人工智能技术应用的。

【】A.机器学习B.自然语言系统C.专家系统D.人类感官模拟2.基于规则的正向演绎系统的子集形式是。

【】A.子句的析取式(析取范式)B.子句的合取式(合取范式)C.文字的析取式D.文字的合取式3.普遍推广机器学习的第一人是。

【】A.约翰·冯·诺依曼B. 唐纳德·赫布C.约翰·麦卡锡D.亚瑟·塞缪尔4.我国于年发布了《国务院关于印发新一代人工智能发展规划的通知》。

【】A.2016年B.2017年C.2018年D.2019年5.专家系统是一个复杂的智能软件,它处理的对象是用符号表示的知识,处理的过程是的过程。

【】A.思维B.思考C.递推D.推理6.专家系统是以为基础,以推理为核心的系统。

【】A.专家B.知识C.软件D.解决问题7.人工智能的目的是让机器能够,以实现某些脑力劳动的机械化。

【】A.具有完全的智能B.和人脑一样考虑问题C.完全代替人D.模拟、延伸和扩展人的智能8.在图灵测试中,如果有超过的测试者不能分清屏幕后的对话者是人还是机器,就可以说这台计算机通过了测试并具备人工智能。

【】A. 30%B. 40%C. 50%D. 60%9.2016年8月,日本电视台报道称,东京大学医学研究所通过运用IBM的人工智能平台Watson仅用10分钟就诊断出了资深医师难以判别出来的。

【】A.甲状腺癌B.胰腺癌C.白血病D.淋巴癌10.不属于艾莎克.阿莫西夫提出的“机器人三定律”内容是。

【】A.机器人不得伤害人,或任人受到伤害而无所作为B.机器人应服从人的一切命令,但命令与A相抵触时例外C.机器人必须保护自身的安全,但不得与A,B相抵触D.机器人必须保护自身安全和服从人的一切命令,一旦冲突发生,以自保为先11.我国学者吴文俊院士在人工智能的领域作出了贡献。

  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

2
Figure 1: Surface boundaries from a single slice of MRI data Mesh re nement would be unnecessary if one could somehow guess the nal mesh from the start. In the face of complex geometries and inhomogeneities, this seems to be an impossible task. However, if we could get close in the initial stage, fewer re nement steps would be required to reach the nal stage. For our grid to be nearly optimal, it must accurately re ect the geometry and the physics of our system. Effectively, it must be composed of small patches in the areas of high gradient and maintain the integrity of all boundaries. To generate a grid with these properties, we \morph" or interpolate between the shapes of internal source boundaries and external insulating boundaries. Morphing provides the geometric characteristics of the mesh, and the rate of the morph controls the density onterpolated shapes are resampled in space and \time" to provide the actual mesh points. For models with simple topologies, this method produces results similar to mapping methods for grid generation 3]. However, as we will demonstrate, the morphing method is also capable of handling domains with complex topologies.
Steven G. Parker
David M. Weinstein
Christopher R. Johnson
Introduction
Over the past two decades, the techniques of computer modeling and simulation have become increasingly important to the elds of bioengineering and medicine. Although biological complexity outstrips the capabilities of even the largest computational systems, the computational methodology has taken hold in biology and medicine and has been used successfully to suggest physiologically and clinically important scenarios and results. One class of important applications in computational medicine are volume conductor problems which arise in electrocardiography and electroencephalography. The solution to these problems have utility in de brillation studies and in impedance imaging tomography, and they are important in the detection and location of arrhythmias and in the localization and analysis of spontaneous brain activity in epileptic 1
r r ;
1 In this paper, we will focus upon primarily applications in cardiology, but note that the methods we develop are directly applicable to electroencephalography and other problems in computational medicine.
A Morphing Algorithm for Generating Near Optimal Grids: Applications in Computational Medicine
Department of Computer Science, University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA sparker@ Department of Computer Science, University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA dweinste@ Department of Computer Science, University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA crj@
patients1. In general, these methods are a form of electric and potential eld imaging and can be used to estimate the electrical activity inside a bounded volume conductor, either from potential measurements on an outer surface or directly from interior bioelectric sources. The bioelectric elds that arise in the human body are, in general, governed by Maxwell's equations. Because of the time scale of bioelectric signals within the volume conductors of the thorax and skull, charge is distributed throughout the volume virtually instantaneously such that we can invoke a quasi-static approximation. The bioelectric elds can thus be described by the Poisson equation for electrical conduction, if we know the current distribution within the volume, or by Laplace's equation, if we know the voltage distribution on a bounded surface. This yields the general formulation, ( ) = ISV (1) where is the conductivity tensor, is the potential, and ISV the cardiac sourcecurrent density. Two primary problems can be formulated from Equation (1). The rst is the direct problem in electrocardiography (ECG): given a subset of potentials on the surface of the heart, or a description of the primary current sources within the heart, calculate the electric and potential elds within the body and upon the surface of the torso. The second is the problem of cardiac de brillation: given known currents or voltages which are applied from external sources (e.g. de brillation electrodes), determine the distribution of applied current throughout the heart. To solve these problems, we have constructed a geometric model of the human thorax 1, 2] from 116 MRI scans recorded in 5 mm increments. Images were digitized into a set of discrete contours (poly-lines) and after some smoothing, additional points were added between the contours and the images were tesselated into a discrete set of elements - triangles for two-dimensional models and tetrahedra for three-dimensional models. A nite element (FE) analysis is then utilized to approximate the bioelectric elds throughout the discretized geometry according to (1). A problem which immediately arises in constructing such discrete models and the primary topic of this paper is, how does one know, a priori, what is an appropriate level of mesh discretization which balances solution accuracy and computational e ciency? While at this point, there does not exist an answer to this question, we have taken a step towards seeking a plausible (if not optimal) approximation. Traditionally, in adaptive nite element methods, one would start with a discretization of the geometry which conforms to the topology of the solution domain. Then a nite element solution would be computed and an error analysis performed to nd elements which need re nement. Additional elements would be included (or the order of the basis function increased) and this would continue in an iterative fashion until some a priori convergence criteria had been reached.
相关文档
最新文档