home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!netnews.cc.lehigh.edu!ns1.cc.lehigh.edu!fc03
- From: fc03@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (Frederick W. Chapman)
- Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
- Subject: Re: Choice of optimization methods
- Message-ID: <1992Jul27.154747.167326@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu>
- Date: 27 Jul 92 15:47:47 GMT
- Organization: Lehigh University
- Lines: 39
-
- In article <1992Jul27.035416.7414@u.washington.edu>,
- charlie@ernie.stat.washington.edu (Charlie Geyer) writes:
-
- >We just had a talk here last week that said that GAs had essentially no
- >theory -- the "fundamental theorem" isn't even a theorem, and so forth.
- >I haven't looked at the literature myself, but the speaker seemed to make
- >a reasonable case. So two questions:
- >
- > 1. Do GAs have any real theory?
- >
- > 2. Is there any problem in which GAs beat simulated annealing?
- >
- >--
- >Charles Geyer
- >School of Statistics
- >University of Minnesota
- >charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu
-
-
- You might want to contact
-
- Lester Ingber (ingber@umiacs.umd.edu)
- Bruce Rosen (brosen@cis.udel.edu)
-
- who co-authored the paper
-
- Genetic Algorithms and Very Fast Simulated Re-Annealing: A Comparison
-
- The paper asserts that
-
- - VFSR is statistically guaranteed to find the function optima
- - tests suggest that VFSR is orders of magnitude more efficient than GA
- --
-
- o ------------------------------------------------------------------------- o
- | Frederick W. Chapman, User Services, Computing Center, Lehigh University |
- | Campus Phone: 8-3218 Preferred E-mail Address: fc03@Lehigh.Edu |
- | "I do comedy and magic; what you don't find funny -- that's the magic." |
- o ------------------------------------------------------------------------- o
-