Standard Steady State Genetic Algorithms Can Hillclimb Faster than Mutation-only Evolutionary Algorithms
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Explaining to what extent the real power of genetic algorithms lies in the ability of crossover to recombine individuals into higher quality solutions is an important problem in evolutionary computation. In this paper we show how the interplay between mutation and crossover can make genetic algorithms hillclimb faster than their mutation-only counterparts. We devise a Markov Chain framework that allows to rigorously prove an upper bound on the runtime of standard steady state genetic algorithms to hillclimb the OneMax function. The bound establishes that the steady-state genetic algorithms are 25% faster than all standard bit mutation-only evolutionary algorithms with static mutation rate up to lower order terms for moderate population sizes. The analysis also suggests that larger populations may be faster than populations of size 2. We present a lower bound for a greedy (2+1) GA that matches the upper bound for populations larger than 2, rigorously proving that 2 individuals cannot outperform larger population sizes under greedy selection and greedy crossover up to lower order terms. In complementary experiments the best population size is greater than 2 and the greedy genetic algorithms are faster than standard ones, further suggesting that the derived lower bound also holds for the standard steady state (2+1) GA.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 4 Aug 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 0; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2021On Steady-State Evolutionary Algorithms and Selective Pressure: Why Inverse Rank-Based Allocation of Reproductive Trials is Bestcited by 3
- 2021An Extended Jump Functions Benchmark for the Analysis of Randomized Search Heuristicscited by 3
- 2024Many Objective Problems Where Crossover is Provably Essentialcited by 3
- 2026Runtime Analysis of Cartesian Genetic Programming in Evolving Boolean Functionscited by 0
- 2026Runtime Analysis of Cartesian Genetic Programming in Evolving Boolean Functions14 Jun 2026
- 2024Many Objective Problems Where Crossover is Provably Essential24 Dec 2024
- 2021An Extended Jump Functions Benchmark for the Analysis of Randomized Search Heuristics7 May 2021
- 2021On Steady-State Evolutionary Algorithms and Selective Pressure: Why Inverse Rank-Based Allocation of Reproductive Trials is Best18 Mar 2021