Talk:Genetic algorithm

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 October 2018 and 5 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jtumina.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Intro
It seems odd to me that GA should only be inspired by "natural selection" and other evolutionary algorithms by "evolution". Crossover, reproduction, mutation are distinct features of GAs as well. --Robin to Roxel (talk) 16:39, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Removed content about genetic algorithms for Monte Carlo integration
This version of the article contained text about Monte Carlo methods and signal processing, that were removed with this edit. I link them here per WP:PRESERVE. Diego (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I completely agree that this unbalanced the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:42, 7 September 2015 (UTC)


 * From the probabilistic and statistical point of view, Genetic Algorithms with mutation and selection transitions can be interpreted as a natural acceptance rejection simulation technique equipped with a interacting recycling mechanism. Introduced in the 1950s these genetic type evolutionary Monte Carlo methods are used to sample complex and high dimensional probability distributions. When the number of individuals (and the computational power) tends to infinity, it can be proved that the occupation measures of the individuals converge to a Feynman-Kac measure on path space. These distributions arise in Bayesian inference, nonlinear filtering, rare event simulations, as well as in molecular chemistry, and stochastic optimization. In contrast to heuristic like genetic algorithms discussed in the literature on genetic algorithms, the genetic type Monte Carlo methods discussed in this article are mathematically well founded, and they allow to solve complex Monte Carlo integration problems.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.200.118.120 (talk) 00:46, 14 September 2015 (UTC)


 * This version of the article contained essential informations on the use of genetic algorithms for solving Monte Carlo integration problems arising in physics, chemistry, risk analysis, and signal processing. This article not only emphasize an avenue of new application domains of evolutionary computation, it also provides rigorous mathematical foundations of genetic algorithms with selection and mutation transitions as the size of the population tends to infinity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierre-delmoral (talk • contribs) 04:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Pierre. Thank you for contributing here, but please bear in mind that we aim for our articles to be accessible to lay-people rather than being rigorous academic sources. The content you added is impenetrable to the average reader who comes here wanting to know what a genetic algorithm is. Additionally, per WP:SELFCITE it is recommended that editors don't cite their own research as this creates problems, particularly in relation to our policy on no original research. If you wish to improve the article, please use sources such as text books or reviews. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 09:39, 14 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Smartse. The removed article doesn't describe any type of mysterious evolutionary algorithm nor any heuristic type impenetrable genetic algorithm. We have been working on the first rigorous mathematical foundations of genetic algorithms for Monte Carlo integration and their refined analysis since more than 20 years. So we were obliged to cite these pioneering studies, we also gave free accessible reviews, precise and verifiable links to related subjects, complementary reviews and works by other authors, as well as links to equivalent algorithms currently used in other scientific disciplines. The removed article also provides a more detailed history on the use of genetic algorithms in computational sciences. Of course, the reader who want to know about rigorous mathematical foundations need to have some knowledge on Monte Carlo integration and the law of large numbers. A reader with some basic background in these two subjects will understand without any difficulties the mathematical aspects of genetic algorithms when the size of the population tends to infinity. I thought an article on genetic algorithms should at least explain what happens when the computational power and the size of the population tends to infinity. I didn't knew it was preferable to have only a text describing all the heuristic cooking rules that can be used in practice. I would like to add that I will not insist anymore here in explaining the importance of genetic algorithms in Monte Carlo integration. I wrote the removed article only to improve the understanding of genetic algorithms when the size of the population tends to infinity, to give an avenue of new application domains, and indicate other scientific disciplines using genetic algorithms to solve integration problems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierre-delmoral (talk • contribs) 20:33, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Criticism section
There are algorithms out there that prove exactly the contrary of what the algorithms mentioned here are supposed to show. And these do not only come from YECs. So my question is: would you allow to create a section where these algorithms are at least mentioned or maybe even discussed? I know, most of the users who created this page are deeply convinced evolutionists. This is why I ask before inserting such a section in order to prevent myself from wasting my time: are you sufficiently impartial to allow others to express their disagreement with your views? Remember that the servers of Wikipedia stand on American ground and liberty of expression is defended and granted by the US constitution... EternalAsker (talk) 18:18, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I see you are a new editor; welcome to Wikipedia. In general, content to be added to articles must be verifiable. See WP:VERIFY for an explanation. That means that content must come from summarizing reliable sources in a neutral manner. Reliable sources are described in WP:RS. In the context of this topic, RS include peer-reviewed review articles and textbooks. Neutrality is described in WP:N. Adhering closely to reliable sources without injecting our own opinions is a good start toward neutrality.
 * Regarding your particular question, I don't understand what you are proposing (for example, what is a YEC?). Whatever algorithms or theorems you are considering to add, probably a good start is to list here the reliable sources that discuss those topics.
 * Regarding liberty of expression, Wikipedia does not engage in censorship, see WP:CENSORSHIP. But with respect to the US constitution, Wikipedia is a public charity and thus has the right to determine what content is appropriate for the encyclopedia. See WP:FREE for a discussion. Good luck, --Mark viking (talk) 20:00, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

YEC = Young Earth Creationist. I am not one of them and don't agree with them. However, I think it is not correct to not allow them in the discussion and exchange of ideas. You say only peer-reviewed articles are allowed. I see a problem here because also creationists from all colors publish peer-reviewed articles. However, I don't see any links to such sources, from which I conclude that they are removed... So where is the neutrality in all this? What I see is not neutrality but propaganda in favor of evolutionary concepts (from which especially natural selection) under the cover of neutrality. Not a single mention of any criticism, problems to be solved with regard to the origins of species, etc. This is not neutral if only an atheist minority has its word to say. EternalAsker (talk) 21:31, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clarification. This article is about the computer science concept of genetic algorithm. While the ideas behind genetic algorithms drew inspiration from the biological theory of evolution, it is just an optimization method. As a piece of mathematics, I have never seen strong claims made that the field of genetic algorithms has any relevance to biological evolution, much less spiritual matters. It sounds like you are more interested in the biological theory of evolution. The biological theory is at Evolution. The sort of criticism content you might be looking for is in articles such as Social effects of evolutionary theory, Creation–evolution controversy, and Objections to evolution. --Mark viking (talk) 23:55, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Genetic algorithm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130615042000/http://samizdat.mines.edu/ga_tutorial/ga_tutorial.ps to http://samizdat.mines.edu/ga_tutorial/ga_tutorial.ps

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:10, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Intro paragraph should be edited
The following is bad/false in the article and should be removed: "John Holland introduced genetic algorithms in 1960 based on the concept of Darwin’s theory of evolution, and his student David E. Goldberg further extended GA in 1989."

FALSE: John Holland introduced genetic algorithms in 1960 --- There is no paper from 1960 which supports this claim. Actually, Bremermann (see history section of this article) introduced GAs in the 1960s before JH started publishing on the subject.

UNJUST BIAS: his student David E. Goldberg further extended GA in 1989. --- This unjustly overemphasized DEG's contribution (which is not disputed as a valid contribution). As the history section of this article shows, there was a lot of GA research /before/ DEG's stellar rise. It is also unclear /what/ DEG's "extension" actually is and means.

LMSchmitt (talk • contribs) 00:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Good catch. I removed the disputed sentence. I think it is worth mentioning DEG in the History section, as my admittedly inexpert impression is that he did a lot to bring GAs into the applied engineering domain. If you know the GA history and have some sources to back it up, please feel free to add to the History section! -- 03:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)