Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Learning classifier system
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== The revolution === Interest in learning classifier systems was reinvigorated in the mid 1990s largely due to two events; the development of the [[Q-learning|Q-Learning]] algorithm<ref>Watkins, Christopher John Cornish Hellaby. "Learning from delayed rewards." PhD diss., University of Cambridge, 1989.</ref> for [[reinforcement learning]], and the introduction of significantly simplified Michigan-style LCS architectures by Stewart Wilson.<ref name=":10">{{Cite journal|last=Wilson|first=Stewart W.|date=1995-06-01|title=Classifier Fitness Based on Accuracy|journal=Evol. Comput.|volume=3|issue=2|pages=149β175|doi=10.1162/evco.1995.3.2.149|issn=1063-6560|citeseerx=10.1.1.363.2210|s2cid=18341635}}</ref><ref name=":6">{{Cite journal|last=Wilson|first=Stewart W.|date=1994-03-01|title=ZCS: A Zeroth Level Classifier System|journal=Evolutionary Computation|volume=2|issue=1|pages=1β18|doi=10.1162/evco.1994.2.1.1|issn=1063-6560|citeseerx=10.1.1.363.798|s2cid=17680778}}</ref> Wilson's '''Zeroth-level Classifier System (ZCS)'''<ref name=":6" /> focused on increasing algorithmic understandability based on Hollands standard LCS implementation.<ref name=":4" /> This was done, in part, by removing rule-bidding and the internal message list, essential to the original BBA credit assignment, and replacing it with a hybrid BBA/[[Q-learning|Q-Learning]] strategy. ZCS demonstrated that a much simpler LCS architecture could perform as well as the original, more complex implementations. However, ZCS still suffered from performance drawbacks including the proliferation of over-general classifiers. In 1995, Wilson published his landmark paper, "Classifier fitness based on accuracy" in which he introduced the classifier system '''XCS'''.<ref name=":10" /> XCS took the simplified architecture of ZCS and added an accuracy-based fitness, a niche GA (acting in the action set [A]), an explicit generalization mechanism called ''subsumption'', and an adaptation of the [[Q-learning|Q-Learning]] credit assignment. XCS was popularized by its ability to reach optimal performance while evolving accurate and maximally general classifiers as well as its impressive problem flexibility (able to perform both [[reinforcement learning]] and [[supervised learning]]). XCS later became the best known and most studied LCS algorithm and defined a new family of ''accuracy-based LCS''. ZCS alternatively became synonymous with ''strength-based LCS''. XCS is also important, because it successfully bridged the gap between LCS and the field of [[reinforcement learning]]. Following the success of XCS, LCS were later described as reinforcement learning systems endowed with a generalization capability.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Lanzi|first=P. L.|title=Learning classifier systems from a reinforcement learning perspective|journal=Soft Computing|language=en|volume=6|issue=3β4|pages=162β170|doi=10.1007/s005000100113|issn=1432-7643|year=2002|s2cid=39103390}}</ref> [[Reinforcement learning]] typically seeks to learn a value function that maps out a complete representation of the state/action space. Similarly, the design of XCS drives it to form an all-inclusive and accurate representation of the problem space (i.e. a ''complete map'') rather than focusing on high payoff niches in the environment (as was the case with strength-based LCS). Conceptually, complete maps don't only capture what you should do, or what is correct, but also what you shouldn't do, or what's incorrect. Differently, most strength-based LCSs, or exclusively supervised learning LCSs seek a rule set of efficient generalizations in the form of a ''best action map'' (or a ''partial map''). Comparisons between strength vs. accuracy-based fitness and complete vs. best action maps have since been examined in greater detail.<ref>Kovacs, Timothy Michael Douglas. ''A Comparison of Strength and Accuracy-based Fitness in Learning and Classifier Systems''. 2002.</ref><ref>{{cite book | chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-48104-4_6 | doi=10.1007/3-540-48104-4_6 | chapter=Two Views of Classifier Systems | title=Advances in Learning Classifier Systems | series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science | date=2002 | last1=Kovacs | first1=Tim | volume=2321 | pages=74β87 | isbn=978-3-540-43793-2 }}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)