From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo)
To: collins@newton.apple.com (Scott Collins)
Message Hash: a2473cb5ffd49efa293bb258b3220817ce06bdc4fa80ae5f0e32c58d7ce4b546
Message ID: <9308210012.AA04248@netcom5.netcom.com>
Reply To: <9308202305.AA26160@newton.apple.com>
UTC Datetime: 1993-08-21 00:11:52 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 20 Aug 93 17:11:52 PDT
From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 93 17:11:52 PDT
To: collins@newton.apple.com (Scott Collins)
Subject: Re: genetic algorithms for crypto analysis
In-Reply-To: <9308202305.AA26160@newton.apple.com>
Message-ID: <9308210012.AA04248@netcom5.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Scott Collins discusses the contraint of crossover with the male/
female partition and dominance. This is theoretically
interesting, especially to biology. I know of no theoretical
proof that such constraints improve the search of choppy search spaces,
and there is little empirical evidence -- this is a cutting-edge research
topic.
The poster who first brought up sexual reproduction was discussing it in
terms of its cutting and pasting of strings: crossover. Crossover
itself provides a far more general solution than simple mutating,
hill-climbing algorithms; specifically GAs are better in choppy,
non-continuous spaces. The empirical evidence for this is quite
substantial (the literature on GAs) and there is theoretical
substantiation (Holland, Goldberg, et. al.). Perhaps constraining
with male/female and dominance provides even further improvement
for some kinds of choppiness, as might (more generally) demes,
but those are open research questions in the GA community, not
immediately germane to the general question of whether GA might be
useful for cryptanalysis.
I'd like to hear more about the male/female partition and dominance
-- on comp.ai.genetic, ga-distr, or genetic-programming
which I read regularly, and are much more appropriate for discussing
this issue.
Nick Szabo szabo@netcom.com
Return to August 1993
Return to “szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo)”