News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Using Genetic Algorithms to Break Things by srean on Sunday May 25, 2014 @05:29AM (#7795929)
With apologies, if a proponent of an algorithm cannot tell me under what circumstances the proposed algorithm would do better, the proponent is selling me snake oil. There has to be some quantitative statements about their properties, not necessarily proof of convergence to the global optimum. Otherwise it is not science, (yet). Its not an understanding of the space of an arbitrary problem that I desire, it is a measurable or mathematical characterization of the space where these algorithms work well, ideally the process of measurement should be cheaper than applying the algorithm.

EDIT: replaced 'you' with 'proponent' lest it gives the impression that I meant it personally.

Re:Using Genetic Algorithms to Break Things by Houshalter on Sunday May 25, 2014 @09:58AM (#7796331)
We do know what kinds of situations genetic algorithms do well at (though generally other metaheuristics like hillclimbing do slightly better.) The fitness landscape has to be as smooth as possible and not have bad local optima. You want as few variables as possible. And you want them to be independently correlated with fitness. If an improvement requires multiple things to mutate all at once it's unlikely to happen.

There are various other heuristics. But you definitely need to have an understanding of the solution space (as well as the alternative) to know for sure.