2012
DOI: 10.1007/s10710-012-9177-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Better GP benchmarks: community survey results and proposals

Abstract: We present the results of a community survey regarding genetic programming benchmark practices. Analysis shows broad consensus that improvement is needed in problem selection and experimental rigor. While views expressed in the survey dissuade us from proposing a large-scale benchmark suite, we find community support for creating a ''blacklist'' of problems which are in common use but have important flaws, and whose use should therefore be discouraged. We propose a set of possible replacement problems.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
135
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 198 publications
(140 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
(43 reference statements)
1
135
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The method also needs to be validated in more complex symbolic regression problems, such as those suggested as GP benchmarks (White et al, 2013). Finally, other methods for combining different solutions are worth further investigation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The method also needs to be validated in more complex symbolic regression problems, such as those suggested as GP benchmarks (White et al, 2013). Finally, other methods for combining different solutions are worth further investigation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to test these approaches, both GE and CFG-GP were applied to three recommended symbolic regression benchmarks [26]:…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This problem has also been used for benchmarking (Harper, 2012), and has been recommended as a replacement for "toy" problems such as symbolic regression of the quartic polynomial (McDermott et al, 2012;White et al, 2013).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%