This problem seeks a minimum within a convex domain specified by a convex hull, a set of points such that all points in the search space are normalized linear combinations of those points. Each solution is represented by a set of weights w such that there is one for each point in the convex hull, , and . In this example the feasible region is the convex hull defined by the set of points (-3 -2), (3 -2), (-3 2), and (3 2). The objective function is a six-hump camel-back function (see Michalewicz (1996), Appendix B), with a known global minimum value of -1.0316 at two different points, (-0.0898,0.7126) and (0.0898,-0.7126). A user mutation module is specified, and the simple crossover operator is used. Both the mutation operator and the crossover operator will produce solutions that violate the constraints, so in the objective function each solution will be checked and renormalized to bring it back within the convex hull.
proc iml; /* Test case using user modules for the mutation operator and * for initialization */ start sixhump(w) global(cvxhull); /* Function has global minimum value of -1.0316 * at x = {-0.0898 0.7126} and * x = { 0.0898 -0.7126} */ sum = w[1,+]; /* guard against the remote possibility of all-0 weights */ if sum=0 then do; nc = ncol(w); w = j(1, nc, 1/nc ); sum = 1; end; /* re-normalize weights */ w = w/sum; /* convert to x-coordinate form */ x = (w * cvxhull)[+,]; x1 = x[1]; x2 = x[2]; /* compute objective value */ r = (4 - 2.1*x1##2 + x1##4/3)*x1##2 + x1*x2 + (-4 + 4*x2*x2)*x2##2; return(r); finish; /* each row is one point on the boundary of * the convex hull */ cvxhull = {-3 -2, 3 -2, -3 2, 3 2}; /* initialization module */ start cvxinit( w ) global(cvxhull); sum = 0; a = j(1, nrow(cvxhull), 1234); do while(sum = 0); r = uniform(a); sum = r[1,+]; end; w = r / sum; finish; /* mutation module */ start cvxmut(w)global(cvxhull); row = int(uniform(1234) * nrow(cvxhull)) + 1; r = uniform(1234); w[1,row] = r; finish; id = gasetup(1, /* real fixed-length vector encoding */ nrow(cvxhull), /* vector size = number of points * specifying convex hull */ 1234); call gasetobj(id, 0, /* minimize a user-specified objective function */ "sixhump" ); call gasetsel( id, 5, /* carry over the best 5 from each generation */ 1, /* dual tournament */ 0.95 /* best-player-wins probability */ ); call gasetcro(id, 0.8, /* crossover probability */ 1 /* simple crossover operator */ ); call gasetmut(id,0.05,0,"cvxmut");
call gainit( id, 100, /* population size */ , /* not using constant bounds */ "cvxinit" /* initialization module */ ); niter = 35; /* number of iterations */ summary = j(niter,2); mattrib summary [c = {"bestValue", "avgValue"}]; call gagetval(value, id); summary[1,1] = value[1]; summary[1,2] = value[:]; do i = 1 to niter; call garegen(id); call gagetval(value, id); summary[i,1] = value[1]; summary[i,2] = value[:]; end; call gagetmem(mem, value, id, 1); bestX = (mem * cvxhull)[+,]; print "best X " bestX[l = ""], "best value " value[l = ""]; iteration = t(1:niter); print iteration summary; call gaend(id);
The output results are
best X 0.089842 -0.712658 best value -1.031628 SUMMARY ITERATION bestValue avgValue 1 -0.082301 0.9235856 2 -0.948434 0.1262678 3 -0.956136 0.2745601 4 -1.017636 0.1367912 5 -1.028457 -0.241069 6 -1.028457 -0.353218 7 -1.028457 -0.56789 8 -1.028457 -0.73044 9 -1.028457 -0.854496 10 -1.028509 -0.941693 11 -1.031334 -0.936541 12 -1.031334 -0.90363 13 -1.031373 -0.774917 14 -1.031614 -0.873418 15 -1.031614 -0.886818 16 -1.031618 -0.95678 17 -1.031619 -0.933061 18 -1.031626 -0.885132 19 -1.031628 -0.936944 20 -1.031628 -0.906637 21 -1.031628 -0.925809 22 -1.031628 -0.860156 23 -1.031628 -0.946146 24 -1.031628 -0.817196 25 -1.031628 -0.883284 26 -1.031628 -0.904361 27 -1.031628 -0.974893 28 -1.031628 -0.975647 29 -1.031628 -0.872004 30 -1.031628 -1.031628 31 -1.031628 -0.897558 32 -1.031628 -0.922121 33 -1.031628 -0.855045 34 -1.031628 -0.922061 35 -1.031628 -0.958257
Any problem with linear constraints could be formulated in this way, by determining the convex hull that corresponds to the constraints. The genetic operators and the repair strategy are straightforward to apply, and as this case shows, can give reasonable convergence to a global optimum.