Part IV · Ch. 24 — Neuroevolution

draft

*Evolutionary + connectionist · Control/games · Evolution of network topology/weights.* Uses evolution to discover neural network architectures and weights. Card: ../02-types-of-ai/04-evolutionary.kmd.

🎨 Figure F-IV.24.0Networks that evolve. Brief: network topologies changing across generations (nodes/connections being added), selected by performance on a control task.

Neuroevolution

1. Definition and short history

Applies evolutionary algorithms (ch. 23) to neural networks, evolving structure and weights without backprop. Milestones: NEAT (2002), HyperNEAT; resurges in *neural architecture search* and as an alternative to RL.

2. Foundations

  • Evolutionary biology — evolution of structures.
  • Connectionism — neural networks as phenotype.
  • Gradient-free optimization — population search.
  • Complex systems theory — gradual complexification.

3. Algorithms and architectures

  • NEAT — evolves topology + weights; speciation protects innovation.
  • HyperNEAT — generates connectivity patterns (indirect).
  • ES for RL — evolution strategies competing with policy gradient.
  • Evolutionary NAS — search of deep learning architectures.

4. Inputs

  • Hardware: CPU/GPU; highly parallelizable (independent evaluations).
  • Data: environment/task + fitness function.
  • Data structures: network genomes (graphs), population.
  • Systems: NEAT frameworks, parallel-evaluation infrastructure.

5. Specialized lifecycle

Stage Specialization
0 Problem Control/game where the gradient is hard; architecture search
1 Data Environment + fitness (task reward)
2 EDA Task difficulty, fitness landscape
3 Modeling Network encoding, operators, speciation
4 "Training" Evolve populations of networks
5 Evaluation Task performance, network complexity
5.5 Acceptance Robustness, generalization
6 Production Deploy the best evolved network
7 Monitoring Performance under novel conditions
8 Retraining Re-evolve
9 Governance As per application

6. Capabilities, modes and modalities

Control/discovery: game agents, robotic control, architecture discovery; learns without backprop — useful with sparse/non- differentiable rewards.

7. Limits, risks and ethics

Cost (many evaluations); limited scale vs gradient-based deep learning; best on small/medium networks. Complements, does not replace, the gradient.

8. State of the art and examples

NEAT and descendants, evolution strategies for RL (OpenAI ES), evolutionary NAS; the niche where the gradient fails or the architecture itself is the search target.