Population subset selection for the use of a validation dataset for overfitting control in genetic programming

References

• Archetti, F., Lanzeni, S., Messina, E., & Vanneschi, L. (2007). Genetic programming for computational pharmacokinetics in drug discovery and development. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 8(4), 413–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azad, R., Medernach, D., & Ryan, C. (2014). Efficient interleaved sampling of training data in genetic programming. In Proceedings of the companion publication of the 2014 annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation,  Vancouver, Canada (pp. 127–128).
   Google Scholar
• Cavaretta, M. J., & Chellapilla, K. (1999). Data mining using genetic programming: The implications of parsimony on generalization error. In Evolutionary computation, 1999. cec 99. proceedings of the 1999 congress on, Washington, DC, USA, USA (Vol.2, pp. 1330–1337).
   Google Scholar
• Cawley, G. C., & Talbot, N. L. (2010). On over-fitting in model selection and subsequent selection bias in performance evaluation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 11(Jul), 2079–2107.
   Google Scholar
• Danandeh Mehr, A., Kahya, E., Uyumaz, A., & Erdem, H. (2014, 5). Rectangular side weirs discharge coefficient estimation in circular channels using linear genetic programming approach. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 16(6), 1318-1330. Doi:10.2166/hydro.2014.112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danandeh Mehr, A., & Nourani, V. (2017, 3). A pareto-optimal moving average-multigene genetic programming model for rainfall-runoff modelling. Environmental Modelling and Software, 92, 239–251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derrac, J., García, S., Molina, D., & Herrera, F. (2011). A practical tutorial on the use of nonparametric statistical tests as a methodology for comparing evolutionary and swarm intelligence algorithms. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 3–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dheeru, D., & Karra Taniskidou, E. (2017). UCI machine learning repository. Retrieved from http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml
   Google Scholar
• Ekárt, A., & Nemeth, S. Z. (2001). Selection based on the pareto nondomination criterion for controlling code growth in genetic programming. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 2(1), 61–73.
   Google Scholar
• Foreman, N., & Evett, M. (2005). Preventing overfitting in gp with canary functions. In Proceedings of the 7th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, Washington, DC, USA (pp. 1779–1780).
   Google Scholar
• Gagné, C., Schoenauer, M., Parizeau, M., & Tomassini, M. (2006). Genetic programming, validation sets, and parsimony pressure. In European conference on genetic programming,  Budapest, Hungary (pp. 109–120).
   Google Scholar
• Gathercole, C., & Ross, P. (1994). Dynamic training subset selection for supervised learning in genetic programming. In International conference on parallel problem solving from nature,Jerusalem, Israel. (pp. 312–321).
   Google Scholar
• Gonçalves, I., & Silva, S. (2011). Experiments on controlling overfitting in genetic programming. In 15th portuguese conference on artificial intelligence (epia 2011), Lisbon, Portugal,  (pp. 10–13).
   Google Scholar
• Gonçalves, I., & Silva, S. (2013). Balancing learning and overfitting in genetic programming with interleaved sampling of training data. In European conference on genetic programming, Vienna, Austria (pp. 73–84).
   Google Scholar
• Gonçalves, I., Silva, S., Melo, J. B., & Carreiras, J. M. (2012). Random sampling technique for overfitting control in genetic programming. In European conference on genetic programming,  Málaga, Spain (pp. 218–229).
   Google Scholar
• Gustafson, S., Ekárt, A., Burke, E., & Kendall, G. (2004). Problem difficulty and code growth in genetic programming. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 5(3), 271–290.
   Google Scholar
• Igel, C. (2013, 06). A note on generalization loss when evolving adaptive pattern recognition systems. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 17, 345–352.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langdon, W. (2011). Minimising testing in genetic programming. RN, 11(10), 1.
   Google Scholar
• Li, L.-M., Lu, K.-D., Zeng, G.-Q., Wu, L., & Chen, M.-R. (2016). A novel real-coded population-based extremal optimization algorithm with polynomial mutation: A non- parametric statistical study on continuous optimization problems. Neurocomputing, 174, 577–587.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, X., Zhang, J., & Yin, M. (2014). Animal migration optimization: An optimization algorithm inspired by animal migration behavior. Neural Computing and Applications, 24(7–8), 1867–1877.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, Y., & Khoshgoftaar, T. (2004). Reducing overfitting in genetic programming models for software quality classification. In null, Eighth IEEE International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering, 2004. Proceedings.56–65. DOI:10.1109/HASE.2004.1281730.
   Google Scholar
• Poli, R., & McPhee, N. F. (2014). Parsimony Pressure Made Easy: Solving the Problem of Bloat in GP. In: Borenstein Y., Moraglio A. (eds) Theory and Principled Methods for the Design of Metaheuristics. Natural Computing Series. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33206-7_9 .
   Google Scholar
• Robilliard, D., & Fonlupt, C. (2001). Backwarding: An overfitting control for genetic programming in a remote sensing application. In International conference on artificial evolution (evolution artificielle), Le Creusot, France, (pp. 245–254).
   Google Scholar
• Silva, S., & Costa, E. (2009). Dynamic limits for bloat control in genetic programming and a review of past and current bloat theories. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 10(2), 141–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soule, T., & Foster, J. A. (1998). Effects of code growth and parsimony pressure on populations in genetic programming. Evolutionary Computation, 6(4), 293–309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uy, N. Q., Hien, N. T., Hoai, N. X., & ONeill, M. (2010). Improving the generalisation ability of genetic programming with semantic similarity based crossover. In European conference on genetic programming,  Istanbul, Turkey (pp. 184–195).
   Google Scholar
• Vanneschi, L., Castelli, M., & Silva, S. (2010). Measuring bloat, overfitting and functional complexity in genetic programming. In Proceedings of the 12th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, Portland, OR, USA (pp. 877–884).
   Google Scholar
• Vanneschi, L., & Gustafson, S. (2009). Using crossover based similarity measure to improve genetic programming generalization ability. In Proceedings of the 11th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, Montreal, QC, Canada (pp. 1139–1146).
   Google Scholar
• Vanneschi, L., & Silva, S. (2009). Using operator equalisation for prediction of drug toxicity with genetic programming. In Portuguese conference on artificial intelligence, Aveiro, Portuga (pp. 65–76).
   Google Scholar
• Žegklitz, J., & Pošík, P. (2015). Model selection and overfitting in genetic programming: Empirical study. In Proceedings of the companion publication of the 2015 annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, Madrid, Spain (pp. 1527–1528).
   Google Scholar
• Zeng, G.-Q., Xie, X.-Q., Chen, M.-R., & Weng, J. (2019). Adaptive population extremal optimization-based pid neural network for multivariable nonlinear control systems. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 44, 320–334.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, B.-T., & Mühlenbein, H. (1995). Balancing accuracy and parsimony in genetic programming. Evolutionary Computation, 3(1), 17–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar