odeling is a common but important technique for
signal characterization. With the advent of com-
putational power, many problems that were con-
sidered to be unsolvable in the past can now be tackled
with ease. Successful applications in this area include the
time-delay estimation modeled as a finite impulse re-
sponse (FIR) filter [ 11 for sonar and radar systems; speech
coding using linear predictive coding [2-41; wavelets for
22
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
speech and image coding and recognition [5-81; fractals
for image compression and recognition systems [9-111;
and delayed-X filter [12-141 for active noise control
[ 151, to name but a few.
An efficient model for signal processing is not easy to
come by and is often obtained with the aid of an optimization
scheme. The accuracy of the model is generally governed by
a set of variables or parameters that is optimized in the
IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE NOVEMBER 1996
1051.5888 / 9 h /$5 nflOl99hTFFF
searching domain. Sometimes, it has to operate under a
restrictive bounded area where the optimization algorithm is
not adequate enough to achieve its own task. A typical
example is the constraint on the coefficients of an infinite
impulse response (IIR) filter for stability. As the objective
function can be linear or nonlinear, equality or inequality,
smooth or nonsmooth, the solution is not unique because the
objective function is often problem oriented.
This article introduces the genetic algorithm (GA) as an
emerging optimization algorithm for signal processing.
After a brief discussion of traditional optimization tech-
niques, this article reviews the fundamental operations of
a simple GA and discusses procedures to improve its
functionality. The properties of the GA that relate to signal
processing are summarized, and a number of applications
that are being successfully implemented are described. In 1. GA cycle.
the authors’ view, this paper should contain sufficient
material to simulate an interest in GAS within the signal What are Genetic Algorithms?
processing community.

Genetic Algorithm Cycle

Optimization Algorithms
Traditionally, there are two major classes of optimization
algorithms used, and these are classified as the calculus-based
technique and the enumerative technique. Calculus-based
optimization techniques employ the gradient-directed
searching mechanism to solve the error surface or differenti-
able surface of an objective function [16]. However, for an
ill-defined or multimodal objective function, local optima are
frequently obtained. In signal processing, objective functions
in this category are common since the signal can be noisy,
fuzzy, vague, and discontinuous. Although dynamic pro-
gramming (DP) is capable of handling the local optima
problem and is considered as one of the major enumerative
techniques in operation search [ 171, its simplicity, robustness,
and popularity must be discounted for high computational
consumption. In addition, DP may break down on complex
problems of moderate size-a situation that is widely known
as the “curse of dimensionality.”
In 1975, Holland introduced another optimization pro-
cedure that is much different from two described above. It
is a mechanism that mimics the process observed in natural
evolution and is known as the GA [18-201. This technique
of optimization is similar to its associated algorithms:
simulated annealing [2 I], evolutionary strategies [22],and
evolutionary programming [23, 241, which are classified
as guided random techniques. The C A operates as an
entirely different optimization procedure and provides fur-
ther flexibility and robustness that are unique for signal
processing. Because of its simplistic implementation pro-
cedure, the GA can be used as an optimization tool for
designing AI-hybrid systems for real-world applications
[25-301. Despite the usefulness of the GA and the volume
of literature published on the subject, the uses of the GA
in signal processing are few in number, but, as an area of
application, the potential use of the GA in signal process-
ing is immeasurably wide.
The GA is a searching process based on the laws of natural
selection and genetics. Usually, a simple GA consists of three
operations: Selection, Genetic Operation, and Replacement.
A typical GA cycle is shown in Fig. 1.
The population comprises a group of chromosomes from
which candidates can be selected for the solution of a problem.
Initially, a population is generated randomly. The fitness values of
the all chromosomes are evaluated by calculating the objective
function in a decoded form (phenotype). A particular group of
chromosomes (parents) is selected from the population to generate
the offspring by the defined genetic operations. The fitness of the
offspring is evaluated in a similar fashion to their parents. The
chromosomes in the current population are then replaced by their
offspring, based on a certain replacement strategy.
Such a GA cycle is repeated until a desired termination
criterion is reached (for example, a predefined number of gen-
erations is produced). If all goes well throughout this process of
simulated evolution, the best chromosome in the final popula-
tion can become a highly evolved solution to the problem. A
top-level description of a simple GA is shown in Fig. 2. In the
following paragraphs, we describe various techniques that are
employed in the GA process for encoding, fitness evaluation,
parent selection, genetic operation, and replacement.
2. Top-level description of a simple CA.

NOVEMBER 1996 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE 23

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Encoding Scheme
The encoding scheme is a key issue in any GA because it can
severely limit the window of information that is observed
from the system [31]. To enhance the performance of the
algorithm, a chromosome representation that stores problem-
specific information is desired. In general, the GA evolves a
multiset of chromosomes. It should be noted that each chro-
mosome x, (i = 1,2,...A9 represents a trial solution to the
problem setting. The chromosome is usually expressed in a
string of variables, each element of which is called a gene.
The variable can be represented by binary, real number, or
other forms and its range is usually defined by the problem
specified.
Bit-string encoding [ 191 is the most classic approach used
by GA researchers due to its simplicity and traceability.
However, a string-based representation may pose difficulties
for, and sometimes unnatural obstacles to, some optimization
problems, e.g., the graph coloring problem. The use of other
encoding techniques, such as real number representation [32,
331, order-based representation [34] (for bin-patching, graph
coloring), embedded lists [35] (for factory scheduling prob-
lems), variable element lists [35](for semiconductor layout),
and even LISP S-expressions [36],have, therefore, been
explored.
Fitness Techniques
The objective function (or evaluation function) is a main
source to providing the mechanism for evaluating the status
of each chromosome. This is an important link between the
GA and the system. It takes a chromosome (or phenotype) as
input and produces a number or list of numbers (objective
value) as a measure to the chromosome’s performance. How-
ever, its range of values varies from problem to problem. To
maintain uniformity over various problem domains, a fitness
function is needed to map the objective value to a fitness
value. There are a number of methods, known as fitness
techniques, used to perform this mapping. Two commonly
used techniques are given as follows:
1) Windowing:
Assuming that the objective value of the worst chromosome
in the population is V,, each chromosome can be assigned a
fitness valuei proportional to the “cost difference” between
chromosome i and the worst chromosome. In mathematics, it
i s expressed as
where V, is the objective value of chromosome i and c is a
constant.
If a maximization problem is encountered, a positive sign
is adopted as in Eq. (1). On the other hand, a negative sign is
adopted if minimization is required.
2) Linear normalization:
The chromosomes are ranked in descending or ascending
order of objective value if the objective function is to be
24
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3. Roulette wheel parent selection.
maximized or minimized. Giving the best chromosome a raw
fitness, then the fitness of i-th chromosome in the ordered
list is conducted by a linear function,
where d is the decrement rate. This technique ensures that the
average objective value of the population is mapped into the
average fitness.
Parent Selection
Parent selection emulates the survival-of-the-fittest mecha-
nism in nature. It is expected that a fitter chromosome re-
ceives a higher number of offspring and thus has a higher
chance of surviving in the subsequent generation. There are
many ways to achieve effective selection, including ranking,
tournament, and proportionate schemes [20, 371 but the key
assumption is to give preference to fitter individuals.
For example, in the proportionate scheme, chromosome x
with a fitness value f ( x , t ) has a growth rate tsr defined as:
(3)
where F{t) is the average fitness of the population.
Figure 3 explains the procedure of Roulette Wheel Selec-
tion [20], which is commonly used to implement the propor-
tionate scheme.
Genetic Operation
Crossover is a recombination operator that combines subparts
of two parent chromosomes to produce offspring that contain
some parts of both parents’ genetic material.A probability term,
pc,is set to determine the operation rate. Many GA practitioners
consider the crossover operator to be the determining factor that
distinguishes the GA from all other optimization algorithms.
A number of variations on crossover operations are proposed
and the simplest form is a single-point crossover. An example
is shown in Fig. 4. The parents are randomly selected based on
the above mentioned selection scheme. A crossover point is
randomly selected and the portions of the two chromosomes
beyond this point are exchanged to form the offspring.
4. Example of one-point crossover.
IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE NOVEMBER 1996

,
5. Exunzple of multipoint crossover (m=3).
Original Chromosome
V i
1 New Chromosome
I_.
6. Bit mutution on thefourth bit ojthe old chromosome
Multipoint crossover is similar to single-point crossover,
except that m crossover positions are chosen at random with
no duplication. An example of this operation is depicted in
Fig. 5.
Single- and multipoint crossover define cross points
where the chromosome can be split. Uniform crossover gen-
eralizes the scheme to make every locus a potential crossover
point. A random binary string with the same length as the
chromosome indicates which parent will supply the child
with the associated bit. At each location, the corresponding
bits of the parents are exchanged if the random string contains
a “1” at that location. If the random bit is “0” no exchange
takes place.
Mutation is an operator that introduces variations into
the chromosome. This variation can be global or local. The
operation occurs occasionally (usually with small prob-
ability p,) but randomly alters the value of a string posi-
tion. Each bit of a bitstring is replaced by a randomly
generated bit if a probability test is passed. An example of
mutation on the fourth bit is shown in Fig. 6. The bitstring
[10011010] is to be changed to [10001010] if it passes the
probability test and the randomly generated bit is “0.” No
change will take place if the randomly generated bit is “1 .”
Some GA practitioners use standard mutation to flip bits.
Using this variant, “1” is replaced by a “0,” or vice versa if the
probability test is passed. This approach results in an effective
rate of mutation that is twice as high as the previous one.
Replacement Strategies
After generating the subpopulation (offspring), two repre-
sentative strategies can be proposed for old generation re-
placement:
Generational-Replacement: Each population of size n
generates an equal number of new chromosomes to replace
the entire old population. This strategy may make the best
member of the population fail to reproduce offspring in the
next generation. So the method is usually combined with an
elitist strategy where one chromosome or a few of the best
chromosomes are copied into the succeeding generation. The
NOVEMBER 1996
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
elitist strategy may increase the speed of domination of a
population by a super chromosome, but on balance it appears
to improve the performance
Steady-State Reproduction: This strategy means that only
a few chromosomes are replaced once in the population to
produce the succeeding generation. Usually the worst chro-
mosomes are replaced when new chromosomes are inserted
into the population. The number of new chromosomes is to be
determined by this strategy. In practice, only one to two new
0 chromosomes are being used by steady-statereproduction.
Schema Theory
0
The design methodology of the GA relies heavily on Hol-
land’s notion of schemata [20, 351. It simply states that
schemata are sets of strings that have one or more features in
common. A schema is built by introducing a “don’t care”
symbol, “#,” into the alphabet of genes, i.e., #1101#0. A
schema represents all strings (a hyperplane or subset of the
search space), which match it on all positions other than “#.”
It is clear that every schema matches exactly 2‘ strings, where
“r” is the number of don’t care symbols, “#,” in the schema
template. For example, the set of the schema #1101#0 is
{ 1110110,1110100,0110110,0110100).
Efiect of Selection
Since a schema represents a set of strings, we can associate a
fitness valueffS,t) with schema “S, ” and the average fitness
of the schema. f(S,t) is then determined by all the matched
strings in the population. If proportional selection is used in
the reproduction phase, we can estimate the number of
matched strings of a schema “S” in the next generation.
Let c(S,t) be the number of strings matched by schema “S”
at current generation. The probability of its selection (in a
single string selection) is equal tof(S,t)/F(t). where F(t) is the
average fitness of the current population. The expected
number of occurrences of S in the next generation is
(4)
Let
If E > 0 , it means that the schema has an above-average fitness
and vice versa.
Substitute Eq. ( 5 )into Eq. (4) and it shows that an “above
average” schema receives an exponentially increasing
number of strings in the next generations:
Effect on Crossover
During the evolution of a GA, the genetic operations are
disruptive to current schemata; therefore, their effects
IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE 25
 7. Global GA.
should be considered. Assuming that the length of the chro-
mosomeisL and one-point crossover is applied, in general,
a crossover point is selected uniformly among L - I pos-
sible positions.
This implies that the probability of destruction of a schema
S is
(7)
or the probability of a schema survival is
where (T is the defining length of the schema S defined as the
distance between the outermost fixed positions. It defines the
compactness of information contained in a schema. For ex-
ample, the defining length of #OOO# is 2, while the defining
length of 1#OO# is 3.
Assuming the operation rate of crossover is pc, the prob-
ability of a schema survival is:
(9)
Effect of Mutation
I€the bit mutation probability is pm,then the probability of a
single bit survival is I - p,. Defining the order of schema S
(denoted by o(S)) as the number of fixed positions (i.e.,
positions with 0 or 1) present in the schema, the probability
of a schema S surviving a mutation (i.e., sequence of one-bit
mutations) is
26 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Since p,, << 1, this probability can be approximated by:
Schema Growth Equation
Combining the effect of selection, crossover, and mutation,
we have a new form of the reproductive schema growth
equation:
Based on Eq. (12), it can be concluded that a high average
fitness value alone is not sufficient for a high growth rate.
Indeed, short, low-order, above-average schemata receive
exponentially increasing trials in subsequent generations of
a GA.
Genetic Optimizer for Signal Processing
GAS are considered powerful optimizers in many areas. In
order to explore the application of GAS in the signal process-
ing field, it is important to introduce some of their major
features.
Para Ile1ism
A GA-based signal processing system may be paralleled in a
number of methods to increase the computation speed [38].
The methods of parallelization can be classified as global,
NOVEMBER 1996

8. Ring migration topology.
9. Neighborhood migration topology.
migration, and dzflusion. These categories reflect different
ways in which parallelism is exploited in the GA and the
nature of the population structure and recombination mecha-
nisms used.
A global GA (Fig. 7) treats the entire population as a single
breeding. Based on the master-slave architecture, the internal
parallelism of a GA [20] is explored.
Migration of the GA divides the population into a number
of subpopulations, each of which is treated as a separate
breeding unit under the control of a conventional GA. To
encourage the proliferation of good genetic material through-
out the whole population, individual migration between the
subpopulations occurs from time to time [39-431. Figures
8-10 show three different topologies in migration. Figure 8
shows the ring migration topology where individuals are
transferred between directionally adjacent subpopulations. A
similar strategy known as neighborhood migration is shown
in Fig. 9. Migration is made only between nearest neighbors,
but migration may occur in either direction between subpopu-
lations. Unrestricted migration topology is depicted in Fig.
10. Here, individuals may migrate from any subpopulation to
another. The individual migrants are then determined accord-
ing to the appropriate selection strategy.
The migration model of the GA is well suited to parallel
implementation on multiple-instruction-multiple-data
(MIMD) machines. Given the range of possible population
topologies and migration paths between them, efficient com-
munications networks should be possible on most parallel
NOVEMBER 1996 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
WHILE not finshed
. .Evaluation
IO. Unrestricted migration topology.
WHILE notfinished
11. Diffusion GA.
architecture from small multiprocessor pathforms to clusters
of networked workstations.
Diffusion GA, as indicated in Fig. 11, considers the popu-
lation as a single continuous structure. Each individual is
assigned a geographic location on the population surface and
is allowed to breed with individuals contained in a small local
neighborhood. This neighborhood is usually chosen from
immediately adjacent individuals on the population surface
and is motivated by the practical communication restrictions
of parallel computers [44-481.
Robustness
There are many instances where it is necessary to make the
characteristics of a system variable and adaptive to dynamic
signal behavior and able to sustain the environmental distur-
bance in signal processing. This requires an adaptive algo-
rithm to optimize time-dependent optima that are difficult to
obtain from a standard CA. When using a standard GA, the
diversity of the population is quickly eliminated as it seeks
out a global optimum. Should the environment change, it is
often unable to redirect its search to a different part of the
space due to the bias of the chromosomes. To improve the
convergency of the standard CA for changing environments,
two basic strategies have been developed.
The first strategy expands the memory of the GA in order
to build up a repertoire of ready responses to environmental
conditions. Two typical examples in this group are Triallelic
representation [49] and Structure GA [50].Triallelic repre-
21
 13. A multimodal problem.
12. Feasible region on magnitude vs. delay error plot.

sentation consists of a diploid chromosome and a third allelic

structure for deciding dominance. In Structure GA, the chro-
mosome is represented in a hierarchical structure. The higher-
level nodes in the structure regulate the activation or
de-activation of lower-level genes.
The random immigrants mechanism [511, the triggered
hypermutation mechanism [52, 531, and statistical process
control [54] are grouped as another type of strategy. This
approach increases diversity in the population to compensate
for the changes encountered in the environment. The random
immigrants mechanism is used to replace a fraction of a
standard GA’s population. It works well in environments
where there are occasional, large changes in the location of
the optimum. An adaptive mutation-based mechanism,
known as the triggered hypermutation mechanism, has been
developed to adapt to the environmental change. The mecha-
14. Maximum finding using a CA on multimodal surface.
nism temporarily increases the mutation rate to a high value
whenever the best time-average performance of the popula-
tion deteriorates. Statistical process control can be applied to jectives problem [ S I , enabling one to obtain the Pareto-op-
monitor the best performance of the population so that the timal set instead of a single solution. Decision makers can
GA-based optimization system adapts to the continuous, progressively articulate their performance while learning
time-dependent nonstationary environment. about the problem’s trade-offs [56].
Other examples of multiobjectives problems are illus-
trated in [57] where the GA is used to search the Pareto-op-
Multiple 0bjectives
timal set of the best compromises between magnitude
response error (root-sum-weighted-squared error) and added
It is very common to have more than one objective for cost (total number of additions/subtractions required for im-
optimization in signal processing applications. The design of plementation). An overview of the GA in multiple objectives
the IIR filter is a typical example. Given the magnitude and problems is discussed in [SS]. Different approaches are re-
group-delay, IIR filter design can be easily converted into a viewed and their similarities and differences are discussed.
multiple objectives problem. Expressions for the magnitude
error e,,, and delay errors ed with respect to a given specifica-
tion may be formulated into the IIR filter coefficients and the Multimodality
gain. The feasible set of filters representing all stable filters
of a given order is depicted in Fig. 12. The multimodal function is prevalent in signal processing.
The simultaneous optimization of competing objective The multimodal error surface of the IIR filter is well known
functions e,nand e, seldom admits a single and perfect solu- and is particularly difficult for use with conventional optimi-
tion. Instead, a Pareto-optimal set of filters having optimal zation algorithms. Such algorithms that use gradient descent
trade-offs of magnitude and delay performance are usually may become “stuck” in local minima on the error surface.
obtained and illustrated as curve ABC. The GA has been Another example is the time-delay problem [59] with the
demonstrated as being a powerful method for this multiob- mean-square error (MSE) surface expressed as

28 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE NOVEMBER 1996

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
where
D is the time delay;
b is the estimated time delay;
01 and on2 is the signal power and the noise power,
respectively.
The error surface is multimodal with the global minimum
appearing at D = D . Therefore, in order to avoid lock-up at
local minima, [591 suggests that the initial range of D is
15. System identification with IIR using the GA.

so that the surface is unimodal within such a range.

To illustrate the robustness and ability of the GA to escape
from the local minimum point, simulation was conducted on
the MATLAB GA Toolbox for locating the global maximum
from a mulltimodal surface (Fig. 13) with searching space
equal to 216 x 216. The chromosome is formed by a 32-bit
binary string to represent the x and y coordinates, with 16-bit
resolution each. The best chromosome during the searching
process is depicted in Fig. 14, which clearly shows the ability
of the CA to escape from local maxima and to find the global
maximum point. However, improper design of a CA may
cause genetic drift and reduce the probability of finding the
global optimum. Fitness sharing [60], crowding [20], and
other techniques have been developed to prevent genetic drift
from occurring.

Number Representation
16. IIK model optimization using GA
It is common to have a real-value searching space in signal
The searching space of c, and d,can be defined in the stability
processing problems. Genes used for the GA optimization
triangle [62] in order to ensure the stability of H(z), i.e.,
process can be handled directly through binary or even n-ar-
ray encoding. During recent rescarch, the direct manipulation
of real-value chromosomes has raised a lot of interest. An
experiment currently being undertaken by [32] indicates that
the floating-point representation is faster and more consistent
Such constraints can be embedded in the system by con-
from run to run. On the other hand, [61] has suggested that
fining the searching space of the chromosome. This approach
real-coded GAScan be blocked from further progress in some
situations, although many problems have been solved using can guarantee that only stable filters are generated in each
generation and ensure that the optimal solution is stable.
real-coded GAS. Nonetheless, there is insufficient consensus
to draw any conclusion about which representation is better. Another approach is to set up a penalty scheme for invalid
chromosomes such that they are indeed low performers.
However, appropriate penalty functions for a particular prob-
Constraints lem are not necessarily easy to design, since they may con-
siderably affect the efficiency of the genetic search [63].
In general, signal processing problems are constrained in
several ways. A typical example can be given by a stable IIR Signal Processing Applications of the GA
filter design. A GA can manage the constraints in two differ-
ent ways. Being a powerful optimization tool, the GA has explored a
Consider the transfer function of the N-th order IIR filter as: large number of applications in signal processing. It is impos-
sible to cover all of these since the list is always growing. In
this section, we will pinpoint some of the most successful
applications of GAS in the signal processing area.

NOVEMBER 1996 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSINGMAGAZINE 29

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

17. Chromosome coding.
IIR Adaptive Filtering
Many problems in signal processing, like noise cancellation,
equalization, time-delay estimation, etc., can be charac-
terized as system identification problems, where one must
gather data from a system whose structure is initially un-
known. A resulting model can then be used for prediction and
control of the system. The application of IIR in system
identification has been widely studied recently. This process
is accomplished by successively adjusting the parameters of
the adaptive filter until the difference between its output and
that of the unknown system is minimized. Due to the multi-
modality of IIR error surface and the multiple criteria for
optimization, the GA is well suited for optimizing the filter
coefficients to search for global optima. Figure 15 shows a
general system in which the application of the GA is found
[55,57, 64, 651.
The IIR filter can be realized by lattice form or cascaded
direct form. By constraining the range of the filter coefficient,
the stability can be guaranteed. Filter coefficients are en-
coded in binary strings to formulate the chromosome struc-
ture. The fitness function is defined as the estimation MSE of
the IIR filter that is to be minimized by the GA.
A simulation was conducted to illustrate the effectiveness
of the GA for IIR filter optimization. The IIR filter was
estimated in the form of zero and double poles. The input
signal was randomly generated. Figure 16 shows the esti-
mated poles of the IIR filter within the first 300 generations.
All the filter coefficients were represented by 16-bit strings.
30 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Nonlinear Model Selection
As the performance of a GA does not really rely on the error
surface of a cost function, it was proposed to demonstrate its
effectiveness in selecting the nonlinear model terms of the
NARMAX model (Nonlinear Auto-Regressive Moving Av-
erage model with exogenous inputs) by [66]. For example, a
model with seven terms of degree up to three and maximum
lags has CT = 6124520 possible cases.
Although terms such as u(t - l)y(t - 4) and u(t - 2)y(t -
4), for example, may appear conceptually similar, their con-
tributions to the final model can be drastically different.
Hence, the term was coded by the index in Fig. 17 instead of
using binary encoding of term lags. The chromosome was
formulated by an integer string while each integer repre-
sented a particular term.
A GA with a population size of 40 was run for 90 genera-
tions in order to search for models that had low residual
variance. The original system is in the form as follows:
y ( t ) = f(u(t-l,...),y(t-l;..)
= a,y(t - 1)+ a,u(t - 1)+ a,y(t - 2)* + a,u(t - 3)3
+ u,y(t - 2)u(t - 1)’ + e(t)
(17)
where u(t) and e(t) consist of two independent pseudo-ran-
dom sequences that were uniformly and normally distributed.
The signal-to-noise ratio was set as 20dB.
Within the optimization process, the first 500 points of
data were used to search for the model with low residual
variance. The remaining 500 points were divided into two
sets and used for determination of the one-step-ahead predic-
tion error (OSAPE) and the long-term prediction error
(LTPE) of the best models in which OSAPE and LTPE are
computed as
where N is the total number of data points in the set, L, is the
maximum lag of the estimated model 3,
y ( t ) is the measured
system output, and j ( t ) is the predicted output from the
model.
F o r the c a s e of O S A P E , j ( t ) i s d e f i n e d as
j(t)=f(u(t-l,...),y(t-l;..)), whereas for LTPE, ;(t) is de-
NOVEMBER 1996
18. Block Diagram of genetic time-delay estimation system

fined as i ( t ) = ~ ( u ( t - l , . . . ) , ~ ( t - l , . . ..) ) Results of the best I = 0.5nlogDf +0.5mlogn

four models are presented in Table 1.
A similar application is presented for the implementation
of a C A on GMDH (group method of data handling) [67].
GMDH is a procedure that attempts to model an unknown
system by iteratively connecting layers of nodes that compute
polynomial functions while introducing a genetic-based self-
organizing network (GBSON) as a procedure for construct-
ing a polynomial network in GMDH. The GBSON proceeds
as follows:
where 0,' is the model's MSE, rrz is the number of parame-
ters, and n is the number of nodes.
Search the space of possible nodes for the current layer by
simple CA with tournament selection, single-point cross-
over, and point mutation.
Select the peak nodes to form the new network layer.

Generate GA structures that represent new network nodes. The process repeats for subsequent layers until the C A
Each node is represented by eight fields of a bit string. The converges to a layer with a single node. The resulting network
first two fields identify connection and the last six fields is taken as a model of the input data. Testing is run on the
represent the coefficient of the following output function chaotic data obtained by solving following Glass-Mackey
delay equation [68]:
a + bz, + cz, + dz,z, + ez; + fz:
dX UX(~-T)
-= - bx(t)
dt l+~''(t-~)
where z, and z, are the outputs of the connected nodes in
the previous layer. where z = 30, a = 0.2, b = 0.1.
The result in [67] demonstrates the success in short-term
Calculate the description length of the function represented prediction of chaotic system dynamics of the model gener-
by the new node. ated by the GBSON.

NOVEMBER 1996 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE 31

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Time-Delay Estimation
Time-delay estimation (TDE) is usually solved by changing
the one-dimensional delay problem into a multidimensional
problem with FIR filter modeling. Adaptive filtering tech-
niques have been successfully applied in this area by relying
on the unimodal property of FIR error surface. However, due
to the large number of parameters required for estimation,
biased estimates are often obtained. This is particularly ap-
parent when it is operating under a noisy estimating environ-
ment, although an improved version that can directly estimate
the delay has been reported in [59]. A GA can be applied to
tackle such on-line, time-delay, estimation problems [54].
Modeling of the gain factor and the delay are not required and
the direct estimates of both parameters are optimally obtained
through the genetic optimization procedure.
The fact that the associated delay and gain in this case can
be directly represented by a binary string, i.e., chromosome,
/May
I
22
without modeling of the delay is a significant advantage. This
chromosome is defined in Eq. (20):
where b, E B = {O,l}.
The block diagram of the genetic time delay estimation
system is depicted in Fig. 18.
Comparison is made with the traditional LMSTDE and the
constrained LMS algorithm [59]. The simulation results for
time-invariant and time-variant cases in a noisy situation are
demonstrated in Figs 19 and 20.
Active Noise Control
Active Noise Control (ANC) [15] is a technique that uses
secondary acoustic sources to generate sound waves for
canceling an undesired noise. Active systems designed for
the global control of sound or vibration over a region of space
generally employ multiple secondary actuators (loudspeaker)
and multiple error sensors (microphone) (see Fig. 21). The
system can adjust the secondary sources such that the resul-

2, LMSTDE
=no0005 tant noise received by the error sensors is reduced.
Cansfrained LMS Algorithm
p.=o.oon3 A GA can be applied to find optimally controlled secon-
- Genetic Algorithm
dary signals such that the minimum noise levels are obtained
1 9 k b ' T i in the error sensors. [69] presents a genetic active noise
control system (GANCS) that is able to optimize the error
microphones' outputs as the multiple objectives functions use
the GA. The block diagram of GANCS is depicted in Fig. 22.
The basic structure of this system consists of four funda-
mental units, namely an acoustic path estimation process
19. Comparison ojdifferent algorithms (SNR = OdB). (APEP), a genetic control design process (GCDP), a statistic
monitoring process (SMP), and a decision-maker (DM).
These have been designed to
Delay
50
govern the on-line real-time
performance. The acoustic dy-
45 - Genetic Algorithm
40
LMSTDE p 0 0000s namics of the acoustic paths
LMSTDE P = 0 0002
35 are estimated in APEP while
30
the controller is derived from
25
the GCDP. The purpose of
20 SMP is to monitor the system
15 performance and detect the en-
I O vironmental change so as to
05 ensure the systems robustness.
O 05 10 15 20 25 30 35 4 0 x10'
Sample
Since the multiobjectives
Gain
problem induces multiple non-
dominated solutions, a multi-
ple objective GA (MOGA) is
utilized to find the optimal FIR
controller design C(q-') so as
to minimize an objective vec-
tor

Sample
where CJis the defined search-
20. Time-delay tracking different algorithms (SNR = OdB). ing domain for C(q-');a mul-

32 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE NOVEMBER 1996

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

2 1. Multiple channels active control system.
22. Genetic active noise control system.
tiobjective vector, f, is defined as below for optimization:
1 (1) the exact endpoint registration of utterances and
(22)
wherei is defined as MSE error of i-th error sensor within a
sample window and y1 is the number of error sensors. Real-
number representation [32]is applied.
The objective goal is preset and defined as the desirable
residue noise power level of each error microphone. DM can
select one of the solutions for the ANC based on this preset goal.
In order to embed the goal-attainable method into the MOGA, a
preferable approach is applied for chromosome comparison [56].
An experimental result can be carried out and demonstrates an
effective attenuation of noise in 3D problems.
In addition to the controller design, the system configu-
ration (such as the positions of the secondary loudspeak-
ers) is also important for ANC system performance. The
variation of attenuation with the locations of the optimally
adjusted secondary sources is definitely not a quadratic
optimization problem that appears to be difficult to solve
using conventional optimintion techniques. Evolutionary
NOVEMBER 1996 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
algorithms for finding the optimal positions of eight secon-
dary sources from a possible 32 locations in a model cabin,
forwhichtherearemorethan lo7possible combinations, are
successfully applied in [70]. A binary coding method has
been used, with each possible location being indicated by
a bit position in a binary string. A value of 0 or 1 indicates
the absence or presence of a source. A comparison can also
be given against the random search technique. It can be
concluded that the GA provides an efficient search proce-
dure for these problems.
Speech Processing
Speech Recognition is an active research area in speech
processing and the technique of dynamic time warping
(DTW) is commonly used to evaluate the similarity of two
different speech utterances. This can normally be achieved
by minimizing
where X = ( x , , x*,...x M ) and Y =(y,,y, ,...y,) represent two
speech patterns while x, and y, are the parameter vectors
of the short-time acoustic feature, such as the LPC coeffi-
cient or cepstrum parameter; $ = (qX,$,)is the time-warping
function, relating the indices, i, and i,, of the two speech
patterns to the “normal” time axis k ; ~ I ( $ ~ ( k ) , $ ~ is
( k a) )
short-time spectral distortion defined for x $ , ( ~and
) ypy(k) ;
m(k) is a non-negative weighting coefficient; and M$ is the
normalizing factor, usually defined as M4 =
practical applications, there are some limitations on the use
of DTW:
(2) the use of constant normalization factor M,+,instead of
the actual one.
The former presents the problem of robustness in speech
recognition and the later concerns the accuracy of the algo-
rithm used. In view of these, a GA-based time-warping
algorithm (GTW) [71] has been proposed for improving the
global searching ability of DTW to resolve the said problems.
Let us consider a time-warping path P , starting at (i, , io,)
and ending at (i, , icl,),which are the representations of a
moving sequence. It is specified by a pair of coordinate
increments:
33
where (io, , ioy) and (i, , icy) can be fixed
or varied within a range determined by
the constraints on endpoint uncer-
tainty, on which several assumptions
of endpoint pairs can be made; and
( p , , q , )E L, = ~ ~ ~ , ~ ) ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ , ( ~ ~ ~ ~ , ( ~ . ~ ) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,
which are determined by the local con-
tinuity constraints of the problem.
The time-warping path is now treated
as a chromosome that is defined in Eq.
(24). A population of chromosomes (30
chromosomes) is first generated. The
genes of each individual chromosome
represent a randomly selected local step
from L,. The probability of the selected 23. Comparison of DTW and GTW.
rate is inversely proportional to the
slope weight m(k) of the local step. The initial slope weights Let x be the mean distortion between the test word and the
are determined in a heuristic manner similar to that suggested templates of the reference word wk, such that if x > y,the
in [72].It should be noted that the global continuity constraint decision is made that the reference and test words are differ-
of the problem should also be satisfied by this approach of ent, while if x 5 y,the decision is made that the reference and
gene selection. test words are the same. With such a deciding rule, the
For each permitted pair of starting points (ioX,ioy) and probability of a matching miss P, is
ending points (i&), it is obvious that there are many time-
warping paths between them, and the required number of
steps are not necessarily the same. In other words, every
chromosome has its own length, which is fundamentally
pm = ",iz-,
1 e - ( x - M , ) 2 / 2 0 : dx = e r j k ( y )
(27)
different from the conventional fixed-length chromosome.
where erfc is the standard complementary error function, and
Because the warping paths are directly stored as chromo-
somes, this naturally leads to the possibility of n-best warping
(1 - P,) is the recognition rate for the reference word wk.
path solutions being obtained without extra computation The recognition rate for 10 words is plotted in Fig. 23.
time, although the solutions may not necessarily be optimum. Based on the results, GTW performed better than DTW for
most of the tested words. Furthermore, GTW was found
In order to demonstrate the matching ability of a GA-based
capable of finding n-best paths (in this case, a minimum of
DTW algorithm, experimental investigations similar to that
three possible paths were found to be very compatible to the
of [73]were carried out. The test bed consisted of 10 acous-
performance of matching capability) although it requires a
tically distinct Chinese words, each having 101 utterances
little more (10%) computational time than DTW.
and 100 other randomly chosen words. It should be noted that
To further improve the (;A approach, the use of parallel
all these words were recorded from one particular person and
genetic algorithms (PGAs) may be possible because of the
were speaker dependent only. The results obtained cannot be
intrinsic parallelism of the GA as indicated earlier in the
used quantitatively for the purpose of generalization.
"Parallelism" subsection. However, the use of PGA is no
The performance of the algorithm was evaluated by a
different than other parallel systems, in which the computa-
normal distribution model of distortions between reference
tion performance is largely dependent upon the design of the
and testing patterns [73].As in the decision making scheme
system topology and communication overheads. These two
suggested by L.R. Rainer [73],each word wk in the vocabu-
factors must be seriously taken into consideration in order to
lary of the recognizer was associated with a distortion thresh-
maximize the throughput of PGA architecture so that the
old y,which is defined as follows: inherent nature of GA paralllelism can be fully exploited.
The other advantage of using GTW is its processing
accuracy, which is governed by the dynamically adjustable
normalization factor

where n/r, 1s the mean distortion and OL is the standard
deviation of the reference patterns and the test pattern ob-
tained from the same words, whereas the corresponding Me
and oeare the mean distortion and standard deviation of the
reference patterns and test pattern from different words,
respectively.
where m(k) is determined, based on the time ratio of the
reference patterns and testeal
In DTW, the&$ is usually defined as a constant value only,
rather than a huge computationally intensive algorithm for
the determination of its actual values. Therefore, the use of
GTW provides a means to locate different paths with differ-

34 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE NOVEMBER 1996

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ent normalization factors, which at the end reflects the iden-
tification accuracy of the actual path and makes the calcula-
tion in Eq. (25) in a more reasonable, robust manner.

Discussion and Conclusion

Although the GA is apowerful optimization tool, it does have

certain weaknesses in comparison to other optimization tech-
niques. A number of barriers have yet to be overcome before
it can be applied to some real-world implementations. Due to
the randomness of the GA operation, it is difficult to predict
its performance, a factor that is crucial for hard-deadline,
real-time applications. The source of the problem lies in the
diversity of the chromosomes that cause the on-line system
performance to be unpredictable.
However, there are large classes of problems that appear
to be more amenable to solution by GAS than by any other
available optimization techniques. These tasks often involve
multiple objectives such as ANC problems or optimization
with constraints like the stability assurance of IIR filter
design. Moreover, since the GA can jump out of local optima,
it is more desirable for multimodal problems like direct
time-delay estimation. Perhaps the most encouraging areas
of application are the impending AI-hybrid systems. The use
of GAS with neural networks (NN) and fuzzy logic is ex-
pected to receive more attention in the future. For example,
GAS may be used to optimize the membership functions of
the fuzzy system 1251 or to assist NN operation through the
determination of suitable NN structures [27-301. It is foreseen
that more hybrid systems will be launched for signal process-
ing applications and GAS are an important component of
these developments.

Acknowledgment
Part of this research was conducted in the Department of Auto-
matic Control and Systems Engineering at the University of
Sheffield, UK. The authors would like to thank Professor Peter
Fleming and his research group for their useful advice and for
providing the opportunity to work with them in this area.

K.S. Tang, K.F. Man and S. Kwong are with the City Uni-
versity of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. Q. He is now with South
China University of Technology, Guanzhou, China.

References
1. Y.T. Chan, J.M. Riley and J.B. Plant, “Modeling of Time Delay and its
Application to Estimation of Nonstationary Delays, ” ZEEE Trans Acoust.
Speech, Signal Processing, vol. ASSP-29, pp. 577-581, June 1981
2. N.S. Jayant and P. Noll, Digital Coding of Waveforms, Prentice Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984
3 . J.D. Markel and A.H. Gray Jr., Linear Prediction of Speech, Springer-Ver-
lag, NY, 1976
4. L.R. Rabiner and R.W. Schafer, Digital Processing of Speech Signals,
Prentic-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1978.
5. S. Kadambe and G.F. Bondreaux, Bartels, “Applications of Wavelet
Transform for Pitch Detection of Speech Signals, IEEE Trans. Zform.
”

Theory, Special Issue on Wavelet Transforms and Multiresolution Signal

NOVEMBER 1996 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE 35

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Analysis, 1. Daubechies, S . Mallat and A.S. Willsky, editors, 38(2), pp.
917-924. 1992.
6. M. Antonini, M. Barland, D. Mathieu and I. Daubechies, “Image Coding
Using Wavelet Transform,” IEEE Trans. on Image Proc. 1 (2),pp. 205-220,
Apr 1992.
7. J.S. Lienard and D. d’Alessandro, “Wavelet and Granular Analysis of
Speech,’‘ in Wavelets:Time-Frequenc~lMethods and Phase Space, J.M.
Combes, A. Grossman and Ph.Tehamitchian (editors),second edition, Sprin-
ger-Verlag, New York, 1989.
8. R. Wilson, A.D. Calway and E.R.S. Pearson, “A Generalized Wavelet
Transform for Fourier Analysis: The Multiresolution Fourier Transform and
its Application to Image and Audio Signal Analysis,” IEEE Trans. Inform.
Theory, Special Issue on Wavelet Transforms and Multiresolution Signal
Analysis, I. Daubechies, S. Mallat and A.S. Willsky, editors, 38(2), pp.
674-690, 1992.
9. T. Bedford, F.M. Dekking, M. Breeuwer, M.S. Keane, D. van
Schooneveld, “Fractal Coding of Monochrome Images, ” Signal Processing:
Image Communication 6, pp. 405-419, 1994.
IO. A.E. Jacquin, “Image Coding Based on a Fractal Theory of Iterated
Contractive Image Transformations,” IEEE Trans Image Processing. Vol.
I , pp 18-30, 1992.
1 I . J.M. Beaumont, “Advances in Block Based Fractal Coding of Still
Picturcs,” in Proc. IEE Colloquim: The Application of Fractal Techniques
in Image Processing, pp. 3/1-3/6, 1990.
12. D.R. Morgan, “An Anaysis of Mulitple Correlation Cancellation Loops
with a Filter in the Auxiliary Path, IEEE Trans. Acoustic, Speech andSignal
”
Processing, ASSP-228, pp. 454-467, 1980
13. Youngjin Park, Hyounsuk Kim, “Delayed-X Algorithm for a Long Duct
system,” Inter-Noise 93, Leuvem-Belgium, August 1993
14. L.J. Eriksson, “Development of the Filter-U Algorithm for Active Noise
Control,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 89 ( I ) Jan 199 I .
15. S.J. Elliott and P.A. Nelson, “Active Noise Control,” IEEE Signal
Processing Magazine, Oct 1993.
16. P.E. Gill, W. Murray and M.H. Wright, Practical Optimization, .4ca-
demic Press, I98 I.
17. R.E. Bellman, Dynamic Programming, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, New Jersey, USA, 1957.
18. D.E. Goldberg, “Genetic and Evolutionary Algorithms Come of Age,”
pp. 113-119, Communications ofthe ACM, Vol37, No.3, Mar 1994.
19. H. Holland, Adaptation in Natural und ArriJiciul Systems, Ann Arbor:
The University of Michigan Press, 1975.
20. D.E. Goldberg, “Genetic Algorithm in Search, Optimization, and Ma-
chine Learning” Addison Wesley Publishing Company, 1989.
21. S. Kirkpatrick, C.D. Gellat Jr., and M.P. Vecchi, “Optimization by
Simulated Annealing,” Science, Vol. 220, No. 4598, pp. 671-680, 1983.
22. H.P. Schwefel, “Numerical Optimization of Computer Models,” John
Wiley, Chichester, 1981.
23. D.B. Fogel, System Identification through Simulated Evolution: A Ma-
chine Learning Approach to Modeling, Ginn Press, Needham Heights, MA
02194, 1991.
24. L.J. Fogel, A.J. Owens, and M.J. Walsh, Avtifirial Intelligence througlz
Simulated Evolution, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1966.
25. K.S. Tang, K.F. Man and C Y . Chan, “Fuzzy Control of Water Pi-essure
using Genetic Algorithm,” IFAC Workshop on SafeQ, Reliability and Appli-
cations of Emerging Intelligent Control Technologies, pp, 15-20, Hong
Kong, Dec. 1994.
26. C.L. Karr, “Genetic Algorithms for F L I Z Z
Controllers,”
~ AI Expert, Vol.
6, NO. 2, pp. 26-33, 1991.
27. Vittorio Maniezzo, “Genetic Evolution of the Topology and Weight
Distribution of Neural Networks,” IEEE Trans. Neural Networks, Vol. 5 ,
No. 1, pp. 39-53 Jan 1994
28. P.J. Angeline, G.M. Saunders, and J.B. Pollack, “An Evolutionary
Algorithm that Constructs Recurrent Neural Networks, IEEE Truas. Neural
” 52. H.G. Cobb, “An Investigation into the Use of Hypermutation as an
Networks, Vo1.5, No.1, pp. 54-65, Jan 1994
36 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
29. S.L. Hung and H. Adeli, “A Parallel GenetidNeural Network Learning
Algorithm for MIMD Shared Memory Machines ” IEEE Trans. Neural
Networks, Vol. 5 , No. 6, pp. 900-909, Nov 1994
30. K.S. Tang, K.F. Man and C.Y. Chan, “Genetic Structure for NN Topol-
ogy and Weight Optimization,’’1st IEELEEE Int. Conf on GASin Engineer-
ing Systems: Innovations and Application, pp. 250-255, 12-14 Sept, 1995.
3 1. J.R. Koza, “Genetic Programming: A Paradigm for Genetically Breeding
Populations of Computer Programs to Solve Problems,” Report No. STAN-
CS-90-13 14, Stmdford University, 1990.
32. C.Z. Janikow and Z. Michalewicz, “An Experimental Comparison of
Binary and Floating Point Representations in Genetic Algorithms,” Proc. 4th
Int. Conf. Genetic Algorithms, pp. 31-36, 1991
33. A.H. Wright, “Genetic Algorithms for Real Parameter Optimization,”
Foundations of Genetic Algorithms, J.E. Rawlins (Ed.), Morgan Kaufmann,
pp. 205-218, 1991.
34. L. Davis, Handbook of Genetic Algorithms, Van Nostrand Reinhold,
1991.
35. Zbigniew Michalewicz Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolu-
lion Programs, Springer-Verlag, NY, 1992.
36. J. Kosa, “Evolution and Co-evolution of Computer Programs to Control
Independently-Acting Agents,” Animals to Animals, J.A. Ineger and S.W.
Willson (Eds.) Cambridge, MA: MIT PresdBradford Books, 1991.
37. D. Whitley, “Using Reproductive Evaluation to Improve Genetic Search
and Heuristic Discovery,” Proc. 2nd Int. Con$ Genetic Algorifhms, pp.
108-115., IY87.
38. A.J. Chipperfield and P.J. Fleming, “Parallel Genetic Algorithms: A
Survey,”ACSE Research Report No. 518, University of Sheffield, May 1994.
39. C.B. Petty, M.R. Leuze and J.J. Grefenstette, “A Parallel Genetic
Algorithm,” Proc. 2nd Int. Conf: Genetic Algorithms, pp. 155-161, 1987.
40. R. Tanse, “Parallel Genetic Algorithm for a Hypercube, ” Proc. 2nd Irit.
Conj: Genetic Algorithms, pp. 177-183, 1987.
41. R. Tanse, “Distributed Genetic Algorithms,” Proc. 3rd Con$ Genetic
Algorithms, pp. 434-439, 1989.
42. T. Starkweather, D. Whitley and K. Mathias, “Optimization Using
Distributed Genetic Algorithms,” Proc. Parallel Problem Solving From
Nature I , pp. 176-185. Springer-Verlag, 1990.
43. J.P. Cohoon, W.N. Martin and D.S. Richards,“ A Multi-population
Genetic Algorithm for Solving the K-Partition Problem on Hyper-cubes,’’
Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Genetic Algorithms, pp. 244-248, 1991.
44. G. Robertson, “Parallel Implementation of Genetic Algorithms in a
Classifier System,” Genetic Algorithms and Simulated Annealing, L. Davis
(Ed.), pp.129-140, Pitman, London, 1987.
45. B. Manderick and P. Spiessens, “Fine-Grained Parallel Genetic Algo-
rithms,” Proc. 3rd fnt. Confi Genetic Algorilhms, pp.428-433, 1989.
46. H. Muhlenbein, “Parallel Genetic Algorithms, Population Genetics and
Combinatorial Optimization,” Parallelism. Learning, Evolution, pp. 398-
406, Springer-Verlag, 1989.
47. M. Gorges-Schleuter, “ASPARAGOS An Asynchronous Parallel Ge-
netic Optimization Strategy,” Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Genetic Algorithms,
pp.422-427, 1989.
48. H.M. Voight, I. Santibanez-Koref and J. Born, “Hierarchically Structured
Distributed Genetic Algorithms,” Parallel Problem Solvingform Nature 2,
pp. 145154, Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1992.
49. D.E. Goldberg and R.E. Smith, “Nonstationary Function Optimization
Using Genetic Dominance and Diploidy, ” Proc. 2nd Inl. Conj: Genetic
Algorithms, pp.59-68, 1987.
50. D. Dasgupta andD.R. McGregor, “Nonstationary Function Optimization
using the Structured Genetic Algorithm,” Parallel Problem Solving from
Nature, 2, pp. 145-154, Amsterdam: North Holland, 1992.
5 1 . J.J. Grefenstette, “Genetic Algorithms for Changing Environments, ”
Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, 2, pp. 137-144. Amsterdam: North
Holland, 1992.
Adaptive Operator in Genetic Algorithms Having Continuous, Time-de-
NOVEMBER 1996
pendent Nonstationary Environments,” NRL Memorandum Report 6760,
1990.
53. H.G. Cobb and J.J. Grefenstette, “Genetic Algorithms for Tracking
Changing Environments,” Proc. 5th h t . Con$ Genetic Algorithms, pp,
523-530, 1993.
54. K.S. Tang, K.F. Man and S. Kwong, “CA Approach to Time-variant
Delay Estimation,” International Conference on Control and Information,
pp. 173-175, 5-9 June 1995, Hong Kong.
55. L.J. Nicolson and B.M.G. Cheetham, “Simulated Annealing Applied to
the Design of IIR Digital Filters by Multiple Criterion Optimisation,”
pp.6/1-6/7, Workshop on Natural Algorithms in Signal Processing,
Chelmsfbrd, Essex, 14-16 Nov. 1993.
56. C.M. Fonseca and P.J. Fleming, “Genetic Algorithms for Multiobjective
optimization: Formulation, Discussion and Generalization, ACSE Research
” 70. K.H. Baek and S.J. Elliott, “Natural Algorithms for Choosing Source
Report No. 466, 1993.
57. P.B. Wilson and M.D. Macleod, “Low Implementation Cost 1IR Digital
Filter Design Using Genetic Algorithms, ” Workshop on Natural Algorithms
in Signal Processing, pp. 4/1-4/8, Chelmsford, Essex, 14-16 Nov. 1993.
58. C.M. Fonseca and P.J Fleming, “An Overview of Evolutionary Algo-
rithms in Multiobjective Optimization,” ACSEResearch ReportNo.527, July
1994.
59. H.C. So, P.C. Ching, and Y.T. Chan, “A New Algorithm for Explicit
Adaptation of Time Delay,” IEEE Trans Signal Processing, Vol42, No. 7,
pp.1816-1820, July 1994.
60. Deb, K. and D.E. Goldberg, “An Investigation of Niche and Species
Formation in Genetic Function Optimization,” Proc. 3rd Int. Con$ Genetic
Algorithms, pp. 42-50, 1989.
61. D.E. Goldberg, “Real-Coded Genetic Algorithms, Virtual Alphabets, and
Block,” University of Illinois, Technical Report No. 90001, Sept 1990.
62. John J. Shynk, “Adaptive IIR filtering,” IEEEASSP Magazine, pp.4-21,
Apr 1989.
63. J.T. Richardson M.R. Palmer, G. Liepins and M. Hilliard, “Some
Guidelines for Genetic Algorithms with Penalty Functions,” Proc. 3rd Int.
Con$ Genetic Algorithms, pp.191-197, 1989.
64. R. Nambiar and P. Mars, “Adaptive IIR Filtering Using Natural Algo-
rithms,” pp. 20/1-20/10, Workshop on Natural Algorithms in Signal Proc-
essing, Chelmsford, Essex, 14-16 Nov. 1993.
65. M.S. White and S.J. Flockton, “A Comparative Study of Natural Algo-
rithms for Adaptive IIR Filtering, ” Workshop on Natural Algorithms in
Signal Processing, pp. 22/1-22/8, Chelmsford, Essex , 14-16 Nov. 1993.
NOVEMBER 1996 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE
Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on November 17, 2008 at 11:51 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
66. C.M Fonseca, E.M. Mendes, P.J. Fleming and S.A. Billings, “Non-linear
Model Term Selection with Genetic Algorithms, ” Workshop on Natural
Algorithms in Signal Processing, pp. 27/1-27/8, Chelmsford, Essex , 14-16
Nov. 1993.
67. Hillol Kargupta and R.E. Smith, “System Identification with Evolving
Polynomial Network,” Proc. 4th Int. Con$ Genetic Algorithms, pp. 370-376,
1991.
68. M. Mackey and L. Glass, “Oscillation and Chaos in Physiological
Control System,” Science, pp.197-287, 1977.
69. K.S. Tang, K.F. Man, S. Kwong and P.J. Fleming, “GA Approach to
Multiple Objective Optimization for Active Noise Control, ”Algorithms and
Architecturesfor Real-Time Control 95, pp. 13-19, Belgium, 31 May-2 Jun
1995.
Locations in Active Control System,” Workshop on Natural Algorithms in
Signal Processing, pp. 25/1-25/10, Chelmsford, Essex , 14-16 Nov. 1993.
71. S. Kwong, Q. He and K.F. Man, “Genetic Time Warping for Isolated
Word Recognition, ” Intemational Journal of Pattern Recognition and Arti-
ficial Intelligence (to be published).
72. H. Sakoe and S. Chiba, “Dynamic Programming Optimization for
Spoken Word Recognition,” IEEE Trans. Acoustics, Speech, Signal P roc.
ASSP-26(1), 43-49, Feb 1978.
73. R. Rabiner, A.E. Rosenberg and S.E. Levinson. “Considerations in
Dynamic Time Warping Algorithms for Discrete Word Recognition. IEEE
”
Trans. on ASSP, vol. 26, No.6, Dec. 1978.
74. Heitkoetter, Joerg and Beasley, David, eds. (1994) “ The HitchHiker’s
Guide to Evolutionary Computation: A list of Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQ),” USENET:comp.ai.genetic.
75. A.J. Chipperfield, P. J. Fleming and H. Pohlheim, “A Genetic Algorithm
Toolbox for MATLAB,” Proc. International Conference on Systems Engi-
neering, Coventq, UK, 6-8 Sept 1994.
76. MATHWORKS, “MATLAB User’s Guide,” The Mathworks, Inc, I 991.
77. J.J. Grefenstette, “A User’s Guide to GENESIS v5.0,” Naval Research
Laboratory, Washington, D.C., 1990
78. J.A. Smith, “Designing Biomorphs with an Interactive Genetic Algo-
rithm,” Proc. 4th lnt. Conf. Genetic Algorithms, 1991.
79. B. Thomas, “Users Guide for GENEsYs,” System Analysis Research
Group, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Dortmund, 1992.
80. Y.C. Tang, “Tolkien Reference Manual,” Dept. of Computer Science,
The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1994.
37