A New Look at Solving Minimax Problems with Coevolutionary Genetic Algorithms

  • Mikkel T. Jensen
Part of the Applied Optimization book series (APOP, volume 86)


In recent work coevolutionary algorithms have been used to solve minimax problems from mechanical structure optimization and scheduling domains. The applications have been quite successful, but the algorithms used require the search-space of the minimax problem to have a certain symmetric property. The present article argues that the proposed algorithms will fail to converge if the problem does not have the symmetric property. The difficulty is demonstrated to come from the fitness evaluation of the previous algorithms, and a new kind of fitness evaluation for minimax problems is proposed. Experiments reveal that an algorithm using the new fitness evaluation clearly outperforms the previously proposed algorithms.


Minimax problems Coevolution Optimization. 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. H. J. C. Barbosa. A Genetic Algorithm for Min-Max Problems. In V. Uskov, B. Punch, and E. D. Goodman, editors Proceedings of the First International Conference on Evolutionary Computation and Its Applicationspages 99–109, 1996.Google Scholar
  2. H. J. C. Barbosa. A Coevolutionary Genetic Algorithm for a Game Approach to Structural Optimization. In Proceedings of the seventh International Conference on Genetic Algorithmspages 545–552,1997.Google Scholar
  3. H. J. C. Barbosa. A Coevolutionary Genetic Algorithm for Constrained Optimization. In P. J. Angeline, Z. Michalewicz, M. Schoenauer, X. Yao, and A. Zalzala, editors Proceedings of the 1999 Congress of Evolutionary Computationvolume 3, pages 1605–1611. IEEE Press, 1999. Google Scholar
  4. T. Bäck, D. B. Fogel, and Z. Michalewicz, editors. Handbook of Evolutionary Computationchapter C6 - population structures. IOP Publishing and Oxford University Press, 1997. Google Scholar
  5. V. F. Dem’yanov and V. N. Malozemov. Introduction to minimax. John Wiley & sons, 1974.Google Scholar
  6. S. G. Ficici and J. B. Pollack. A Game-Theoretic Approach to the Simple Co-evolutionary Algorithm. In M. Schoenauer, K. Deb, G. Rudolph, X. Yao, E. Lutton, J. J. Merelo, and H. Schwefel, editors, Parallel Problem Solving from Nature - PPSN VI, volume 1917 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 467–476. Springer, 2000.Google Scholar
  7. J. W. Herrmann. A Genetic Algorithm for Minimax Optimization Problems. In P. J. Angeline, Z. Michalewicz, M. Schoenauer, X. Yao, and A. Zalzala, editors, Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, volume 2, pages 1099–1103. IEEE Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. M. T. Jensen. Finding Worst-Case Flexible Schedules using Coevolution. In GECCO-2001 Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conferencepages 1144–1151, 2001a.Google Scholar
  9. M. T. Jensen. Robust and Flexible Scheduling with Evolutionary Computation. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Aarhus, 2001b.Google Scholar
  10. P. Kouvelis and G. Yu. Robust Discrete Optimization and Its Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. J. Noble and R. A. Watson. Pareto coevolution: Using performance against co-evolved opponents in a game as dimensions for Pareto selection. In L. Spector , editors, Proceedings of GECCO’2001, pages 493–500. Morgan Kaufmann, 2001.Google Scholar
  12. J. Paredis. Coevolving Cellular Automata: Be Aware of the Red Queen! In Thomas Bäck, editor, Proceedings of the seventh International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, pages 393–400. Morgan Kaufmann, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. E. Polak. On the mathematical foundations of nondifferentiable optimization in engineering design. SIAM review, 29: 21–89, 1987.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. M. A. Potter and K. A. De Jong. A Cooperative Coevolutionary Approach to Function Optimization. In Y. Davidor, H. Schwefel, and R. Männer, editors, Parallel Problem Solving from Nature - PPSN III, LNCS vol. 866, pages 249–257. Spring Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar
  15. C. D. Rosin and R. K. Belew. New Methods for Competitive Coevolution. Evolutionary Computation, 5: 1–29, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mikkel T. Jensen
    • 1
  1. 1.EVALife, Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of AarhusAarhus CDenmark

Personalised recommendations