In 2007-9 I developed some software for reading datamatrix patterns. Often these patterns were difficult to read, being indented into scratched surfaces with all kinds of reflectance properties, fuzzy chemically etched markings and so on. I used a GA to fine tune various parameters of the vision algorithms to give the best results on a database of 300 images having known properties. Parameters were things like downsampling resolution, RANSAC parameters, amount of erosion and dilation, low pass filtering radius, and a few others. Running the optimisation over several days this produced results which were about 20% better than naive values on a test set of images unseen during the optimisation phase.

这个系统完全是从零开始编写的，我没有使用任何其他库。我并不反对使用这些东西，只要它们能提供可靠的结果，但是您必须注意许可兼容性和代码可移植性问题。

我构建了一个简单的GA，用于在音乐播放时从频谱中提取有用的模式。输出用于驱动winamp插件中的图形效果。

输入:一些FFT帧(想象一个二维浮点数组) 输出:单个浮点值(输入的加权和)，阈值为0.0或1.0 基因:输入权重 适应度函数:占空比、脉宽、BPM在合理范围内的组合。

我将一些ga调整到频谱的不同部分以及不同的BPM限制，所以它们不会趋向于收敛到相同的模式。来自每个种群的前4个的输出被发送到渲染引擎。

一个有趣的副作用是，整个人群的平均健康状况是音乐变化的一个很好的指标，尽管通常需要4-5秒才能发现。

我曾经使用一个GA来优化内存地址的哈希函数。这些地址的页面大小为4K或8K，因此它们在地址的位模式中显示出一定的可预测性(最低有效位全为0;最初的哈希函数是“粗笨的”——它倾向于每第三个哈希桶聚集一次命中。改进后的算法具有近乎完美的分布。

在工作中，我遇到了这样一个问题:给定M个任务和N个dsp，如何将任务分配给dsp是最好的?“最佳”定义为“最大负载DSP的负载最小化”。有不同类型的任务，不同的任务类型有不同的性能分支，这取决于它们被分配到哪里，所以我将一组工作到dsp的分配编码为“DNA字符串”，然后使用遗传算法来“培育”我所能“培育”的最佳分配字符串。

它运行得相当好(比我之前的方法好得多，之前的方法是评估每个可能的组合……对于非平凡问题的大小，它将需要数年才能完成!)，唯一的问题是无法判断是否已经达到了最优解。你只能决定当前的“最大努力”是否足够好，或者让它运行更长时间，看看它是否可以做得更好。

As part of my undergraduate CompSci degree, we were assigned the problem of finding optimal jvm flags for the Jikes research virtual machine. This was evaluated using the Dicappo benchmark suite which returns a time to the console. I wrote a distributed gentic alogirthm that switched these flags to improve the runtime of the benchmark suite, although it took days to run to compensate for hardware jitter affecting the results. The only problem was I didn't properly learn about the compiler theory (which was the intent of the assignment).

我本可以用现有的默认标志来播种初始种群，但有趣的是，算法发现了一个与O3优化级别非常相似的配置(但实际上在许多测试中更快)。

编辑:我还用Python写了我自己的遗传算法框架，只是使用popen命令来运行各种基准测试，尽管如果不是评估作业，我会看看pyEvolve。

进化计算研究生班: 开发了TopCoder马拉松比赛49:megpartty的解决方案。我的小组正在测试不同的域表示法，以及不同的表示法如何影响ga找到正确答案的能力。我们为这个问题编写了自己的代码。

Neuroevolution and Generative and Developmental Systems, Graduate Class: Developed an Othello game board evaluator that was used in the min-max tree of a computer player. The player was set to evaluate one-deep into the game, and trained to play against a greedy computer player that considered corners of vital importance. The training player saw either 3 or 4 deep (I'll need to look at my config files to answer, and they're on a different computer). The goal of the experiment was to compare Novelty Search to traditional, fitness-based search in the Game Board Evaluation domain. Results were relatively inconclusive, unfortunately. While both the novelty search and fitness-based search methods came to a solution (showing that Novelty Search can be used in the Othello domain), it was possible to have a solution to this domain with no hidden nodes. Apparently I didn't create a sufficiently competent trainer if a linear solution was available (and it was possible to have a solution right out of the gates). I believe my implementation of Fitness-based search produced solutions more quickly than my implementation of Novelty search, this time. (this isn't always the case). Either way, I used ANJI, "Another NEAT Java Implementation" for the neural network code, with various modifications. The Othello game I wrote myself.