CiteULike is a free online bibliography manager. Register and you can start organising your references online.

On the futility of blind search: an algorithmic view of "no free lunch". Export

Evol Comput, Vol. 6, No. 2. (1998), pp. 109-127.

Citation Format

[Posts]

View FullText article


alexisgallagher's tags for this article

evolutionarycomputation nofreelunch

X Reviews [Write a review of this article]

X Find related articles from these CiteULike users

X Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

X Posting History

X Abstract

The paper is in three parts. First, we use simple adversary arguments to redevelop and explore some of the no-free-lunch (NFL) theorems and perhaps extend them a little. Second, we clarify the relationship of NFL theorems to algorithm theory and complexity classes such as NP. We claim that NFL is weaker in the sense that the constraints implied by the conjectures of traditional algorithm theory on what an evolutionary algorithm may be expected to accomplish are far more severe than those implied by NFL. Third, we take a brief look at how natural evolution relates to computation and optimization. We suggest that the evolution of complex systems exhibiting high degrees of orderliness is not equivalent in difficulty to optimizing hard (in the complexity sense) problems, and that the optimism in genetic algorithms (GAs) as universal optimizers is not justified by natural evolution. This is an informal tutorial paper--most of the information presented is not formally proven, and is either "common knowledge" or formally proven elsewhere. Some of the claims are intuitions based on experience with algorithms, and in a more formal setting should be classified as conjectures.


X BibTeX record

X RIS record


Privacy Statement | Terms & Conditions
CiteULike organises scholarly (or academic) papers or literature and provides bibliographic (which means it makes bibliographies) for universities and higher education establishments. It helps undergraduates and postgraduates. People studying for PhDs or in postdoctoral (postdoc) positions. The service is similar in scope to EndNote or RefWorks or any other reference manager like BibTeX, but it is a social bookmarking service for scientists and humanities researchers.