An important question in evolutionary computation is how good solutions evolutionary algorithms can produce. This paper aims to provide an analytic analysis of solution quality in terms of the relative approximation error, which is defined by the error between 1 and the approximation ratio of the solution found by an evolutionary algorithm. Since evolutionary algorithms are iterative methods, the relative approximation error is a function of generations. With the help of matrix analysis, it is possible to obtain an exact expression of such a function. In this paper, an analytic expression for calculating the relative approximation error is presented for a class of evolutionary algorithms, that is, (1+1) strictly elitist evolution algorithms. Furthermore, analytic expressions of the fitness value and the average convergence rate in each generation are also derived for this class of evolutionary algorithms. The approach is promising, and it can be extended to non-elitist or population-based algorithms too.
The relative approximation error belongs to the convergence rate study of EAs, which can be traced back to 1990s @cite_22 @cite_13 @cite_16 . This paper only investigates EAs for discrete optimisation, although the converegnce rate of EAs for continuous optimization @cite_18 @cite_11 @cite_21 is also important. EAs belong to iterative methods. A fundamental question in iterative methods is the convergence rate, which can be formalised as follow @cite_16 . Since the @math th generation solution is a random variable, we let @math be a vector representing its probability distribution over the search space, @math a vector such that @math for the optimal solution set @math and @math for the non-optimal solution set @math . The convergence rate problem asks the question how fast @math converges to @math . The goal is to obtain a bound @math such that @math , where @math is a norm. There are various ways to assign the norm. For example, if the @math th generation solution is a binary string @math and the optimal solution is @math , the norm is set to be the Hamming distance: In the current paper, the norm is set to be the relative approximation error @math .
@cite_18 @cite_22 @cite_21 @cite_16 @cite_13 @cite_11
2084777452 2963005234 2246636461 2343345052
We present a unified framework for the design and convergence analysis of a class of algorithms based on approximate solution of proximal point subproblems. Our development further enhances the constructive approximation approach of the recently proposed hybrid projection–proximal and extragradient–proximal methods. Specifically, we introduce an even more flexible error tolerance criterion, as well as provide a unified view of these two algorithms. Our general method possesses global convergence and local (super)linear rate of convergence under standard assumptions, while using a constructive approximation criterion suitable for a number of specific implementations. For example, we show that close to a regular solution of a monotone system of semismooth equations, two Newton iterations are sufficient to solve the proximal subproblem within the required error tolerance. Such systems of equations arise naturally when reformulating the nonlinear complementarity problem. *Research of the first author is suppo... The purpose of this paper is to establish the almost sure weak ergodic convergence of a sequence of iterates @math given by @math where @math is a collection of maximal monotone operators on a separable Hilbert space, @math is an independent identically distributed sequence of random variables on @math and @math is a positive sequence in @math . The weighted averaged sequence of iterates is shown to converge weakly to a zero (assumed to exist) of the Aumann expectation @math under the assumption that the latter is maximal. We consider applications to stochastic optimization problems of the form @math , where @math is a normal convex integrand and @math is a collection of closed convex sets. In this case, the iterations are closely related to a stochastic proximal algorithm recently proposed by Wang and Bertsekas [Increment... We study the problem of recovering the subspace spanned by the first @math principal components of @math -dimensional data under the streaming setting, with a memory bound of @math . Two families of algorithms are known for this problem. The first family is based on the framework of stochastic gradient descent. Nevertheless, the convergence rate of the family can be seriously affected by the learning rate of the descent steps and deserves more serious study. The second family is based on the power method over blocks of data, but setting the block size for its existing algorithms is not an easy task. In this paper, we analyze the convergence rate of a representative algorithm with decayed learning rate (Oja and Karhunen, 1985) in the first family for the general @math case. Moreover, we propose a novel algorithm for the second family that sets the block sizes automatically and dynamically with faster convergence rate. We then conduct empirical studies that fairly compare the two families on real-world data. The studies reveal the advantages and disadvantages of these two families. This paper concerns the worst-case complexity of Gauss-Seidel method for solving a positive semi-definite linear system; or equivalently, that of cyclic coordinate descent (C-CD) for minimizing a convex quadratic function. The known provable complexity of C-CD can be @math times slower than gradient descent (GD) and @math times slower than randomized coordinate descent (R-CD). However, these gaps seem rather puzzling since so far they have not been observed in practice; in fact, C-CD usually converges much faster than GD and sometimes comparable to R-CD. Thus some researchers believe the gaps are due to the weakness of the proof, but not that of the C-CD algorithm itself. In this paper we show that the gaps indeed exist. We prove that there exists an example for which C-CD takes at least @math or @math operations, where @math is the condition number, @math is a well-studied quantity that determines the convergence rate of R-CD, and @math hides the dependency on @math . This implies that C-CD can indeed be @math times slower than GD, and @math times slower than R-CD in the worst case. Our result establishes one of the few examples in continuous optimization that demonstrates a large gap between a deterministic algorithm and its randomized counterpart. Based on the example, we establish several almost tight complexity bounds of C-CD for quadratic problems. One difficulty with the analysis of the constructed example is that the spectral radius of a non-symmetric iteration matrix does not necessarily constitutes a lower bound for the convergence rate.