When the plus strategy performs better than the comma strategy - and when not

dc.contributor.author	Jägersküpper, Jens	de
dc.contributor.author	Storch, Tobias	de
dc.date.accessioned	2009-05-12T16:00:56Z
dc.date.available	2009-05-12T16:00:56Z
dc.date.issued	2006-11	de
dc.description.abstract	Occasionally there have been long debates on whether to use elitist selection or not. In the present paper the simple (1,lambd) EA and (1+lambda) EA operating on {0,1}^n are compared by means of a rigorous runtime analysis. It turns out that only values for lambda that are logarithmic in n are interesting. An illustrative function is presented for which newly developed proof methods show that the (1,lambda) EA - where lambda is logarithmic in n - outperforms the (1+lambda) EA for any lambda. For smaller offspring populations the (1,lambda) EA is inefficient on every function with a unique optimum, whereas for larger lambda the two randomized search heuristics behave almost equivalently.	en
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/2003/26126
dc.identifier.uri	http://dx.doi.org/10.17877/DE290R-1016
dc.language.iso	en	de
dc.relation.ispartofseries	Reihe CI; 219-06	de
dc.subject.ddc	004	de
dc.title	When the plus strategy performs better than the comma strategy - and when not	en
dc.type	Text	de
dc.type.publicationtype	report	de
dcterms.accessRights	open access
eldorado.dnb.deposit	true

Files

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1