Talk:Tournament selection: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:27, 3 June 2013

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tournament selection article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Robotics Stub‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WikiProject Computational Biology

The pseudo code

The pseudo code seems wrong. It should be:

choose k (the tournament size) individuals from the population at random
select the best of the k individuals

The statement "The chosen individual can be removed from the population that the selection is made from if desired, otherwise individuals can be selected more than once for the next generation" is wrong. For a population of size n, there are n tournaments. If the selected individual is removed from the population, then by the time the nth tournament has been run, there will be n - n individuals who have not been selected. At that point there is no actual selection happening. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.15.40.22 (talk) 21:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The cited paper does not seem to use the p parameter. Can someone add a references to a paper that introduces this parameter? If not, it probably should not be in wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlittman (talk • contribs) 19:44, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematically wrong

If you do the mathematics you will find that either k has to be 0 or that p has to be 1. This doesn't seem right.

--Astenorh (talk) 13:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, there's a (1-p)^k probability that none of the k participants is selected. This could be solved by saying that the worst individual is always selected with a probability of (1-p)^(k-1), or dividing all the probabilities by 1-(1-p)^k. In any case, a clarification is needed. 138.100.74.81 (talk) 08:27, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 13:27, 17 June 2011 edit Alexbateman (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 4,458 edits Added CB template and assessed ← Previous edit		Revision as of 08:27, 3 June 2013 edit undo 138.100.74.81 (talk) →‎Mathematically wrong Next edit →
Line 21:		Line 21:

	--[[User:Astenorh\|Astenorh]] ([[User talk:Astenorh\|talk]]) 13:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)		--[[User:Astenorh\|Astenorh]] ([[User talk:Astenorh\|talk]]) 13:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

			:Right, there's a (1-p)^k probability that none of the k participants is selected. This could be solved by saying that the worst individual is always selected with a probability of (1-p)^(k-1), or dividing all the probabilities by 1-(1-p)^k. In any case, a clarification is needed. [[Special:Contributions/138.100.74.81\|138.100.74.81]] ([[User talk:138.100.74.81\|talk]]) 08:27, 3 June 2013 (UTC)