A comparison of evaluation methods in coevolution
원문 초록
In this research, we compare four different evaluation methods in coevolution on the Majority Function problem. The size of the problem is selected such that evaluation against all possible test cases is feasible. Two measures are used for the comparisons, i.e., the objective fitness derived from evaluating solutions against all test cases, and the objective fitness correlation (OFC), which is defined as the correlation coefficient between subjective and objective fitness. The results of our experiments suggest that a combination of average score and weighted informativeness may provide a more accurate evaluation in coevolution. In order to confirm this difference, a series of t-tests on the preference between each pair of the evaluation methods is performed. The resulting significance is affirmative, and the tests for two quality measures show similar preference on four evaluation methods. %This study is the first time OFC is actually computed on a real problem. Experiments on Majority Function problems with larger sizes and Parity problems are in progress, and their results will be added in the final version.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Multi-Preference Lambda-weighted Listwise DPO for Dynamic Preference Alignment
CuRe: Cultural Gaps in the Long Tail of Text-to-Image Systems
ERU-KG: Efficient Reference-aligned Unsupervised Keyphrase Generation
Power-Law Decay Loss for Large Language Model Finetuning: Focusing on Information Sparsity to Enhance Generation Quality
ICYM2I: The illusion of multimodal informativeness under missingness
Laplace Sample Information: Data Informativeness Through a Bayesian Lens
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.