Can the Problem-Solving Benefits of Quality Diversity Be Obtained Without Explicit Diversity Maintenance?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.07767v1
• Date: Fri, 12 May 2023 21:24:04 GMT
• Title: Can the Problem-Solving Benefits of Quality Diversity Be Obtained Without Explicit Diversity Maintenance?
• Authors: Ryan Boldi and Lee Spector
• Abstract summary: We argue that the correct comparison should be made to emphmulti-objective optimization frameworks. We present a method that utilizes dimensionality reduction to automatically determine a set of behavioral descriptors for an individual.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: When using Quality Diversity (QD) optimization to solve hard exploration or deceptive search problems, we assume that diversity is extrinsically valuable. This means that diversity is important to help us reach an objective, but is not an objective in itself. Often, in these domains, practitioners benchmark their QD algorithms against single objective optimization frameworks. In this paper, we argue that the correct comparison should be made to \emph{multi-objective} optimization frameworks. This is because single objective optimization frameworks rely on the aggregation of sub-objectives, which could result in decreased information that is crucial for maintaining diverse populations automatically. In order to facilitate a fair comparison between quality diversity and multi-objective optimization, we present a method that utilizes dimensionality reduction to automatically determine a set of behavioral descriptors for an individual, as well as a set of objectives for an individual to solve. Using the former, one can generate solutions using standard quality diversity optimization techniques, and using the latter, one can generate solutions using standard multi-objective optimization techniques. This allows for a level comparison between these two classes of algorithms, without requiring domain and algorithm specific modifications to facilitate a comparison.

Related papers

• Illuminating the Diversity-Fitness Trade-Off in Black-Box Optimization [9.838618121102053]
  In real-world applications, users often favor structurally diverse design choices over one high-quality solution. This paper presents a fresh perspective on this challenge by considering the problem of identifying a fixed number of solutions with a pairwise distance above a specified threshold.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-29T09:55:55Z)
• Controllable Preference Optimization: Toward Controllable Multi-Objective Alignment [103.12563033438715]
  Alignment in artificial intelligence pursues consistency between model responses and human preferences as well as values. Existing alignment techniques are mostly unidirectional, leading to suboptimal trade-offs and poor flexibility over various objectives. We introduce controllable preference optimization (CPO), which explicitly specifies preference scores for different objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-29T12:12:30Z)
• Objectives Are All You Need: Solving Deceptive Problems Without Explicit Diversity Maintenance [7.3153233408665495]
  We present an approach with promise to solve deceptive domains without explicit diversity maintenance. We use lexicase selection to optimize for these objectives as it has been shown to implicitly maintain population diversity. We find that decomposing objectives into many objectives and optimizing them outperforms MAP-Elites on the deceptive domains that we explore.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-04T00:09:48Z)
• Multi-Objective GFlowNets [59.16787189214784]
  We study the problem of generating diverse candidates in the context of Multi-Objective Optimization. In many applications of machine learning such as drug discovery and material design, the goal is to generate candidates which simultaneously optimize a set of potentially conflicting objectives. We propose Multi-Objective GFlowNets (MOGFNs), a novel method for generating diverse optimal solutions, based on GFlowNets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-23T16:15:36Z)
• Optimizer Amalgamation [124.33523126363728]
  We are motivated to study a new problem named Amalgamation: how can we best combine a pool of "teacher" amalgamations into a single "student" that can have stronger problem-specific performance? First, we define three differentiable mechanisms to amalgamate a pool of analyticals by gradient descent. In order to reduce variance of the process, we also explore methods to stabilize the process by perturbing the target.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-12T16:07:57Z)
• How to Fill the Optimum Set? Population Gradient Descent with Harmless Diversity [34.790747999729284]
  We propose a bi-level optimization problem of maximizing a diversity score inside the optimum set of the main loss function. We show that our method can efficiently generate diverse solutions on a variety of applications, including text-to-image generation, text-to-mesh generation, molecular conformation generation and ensemble neural network training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-16T23:40:18Z)
• Multi-Objective Quality Diversity Optimization [2.4608515808275455]
  We propose an extension of the MAP-Elites algorithm in the multi-objective setting: Multi-Objective MAP-Elites (MOME) Namely, it combines the diversity inherited from the MAP-Elites grid algorithm with the strength of multi-objective optimizations. We evaluate our method on several tasks, from standard optimization problems to robotics simulations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-07T10:48:28Z)
• Result Diversification by Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithms with Theoretical Guarantees [94.72461292387146]
  We propose to reformulate the result diversification problem as a bi-objective search problem, and solve it by a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm (EA) We theoretically prove that the GSEMO can achieve the optimal-time approximation ratio, $1/2$. When the objective function changes dynamically, the GSEMO can maintain this approximation ratio in running time, addressing the open question proposed by Borodin et al.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-18T14:00:22Z)
• An Analysis of Phenotypic Diversity in Multi-Solution Optimization [118.97353274202749]
  We show that multiobjective optimization does not always produce much diversity, multimodal optimization produces higher fitness solutions, and quality diversity is not sensitive to genetic neutrality. An autoencoder is used to discover phenotypic features automatically, producing an even more diverse solution set with quality diversity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-10T10:39:03Z)
• A Framework to Handle Multi-modal Multi-objective Optimization in Decomposition-based Evolutionary Algorithms [7.81768535871051]
  decomposition-based evolutionary algorithms have good performance for multi-objective optimization. They are likely to perform poorly for multi-modal multi-objective optimization due to the lack of mechanisms to maintain the solution space diversity. This paper proposes a framework to improve the performance of decomposition-based evolutionary algorithms for multi-modal multi-objective optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-30T14:32:57Z)
• Discovering Representations for Black-box Optimization [73.59962178534361]
  We show that black-box optimization encodings can be automatically learned, rather than hand designed. We show that learned representations make it possible to solve high-dimensional problems with orders of magnitude fewer evaluations than the standard MAP-Elites.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-09T20:06:20Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.