Re: [Cilib-users] Calling cilib from existing code

[Gary P. <gpa...@cs...>]

Hi,

Edwin, I agree that would make encapsulation make more sense. I'll check
it out and make the needed changes.

Regards,
Gary

> On Sunday 18 May 2008 15:59:30 David Rooke wrote:
>
>> Also, will CILib bark if, in my custom OptimizationProblem, I leave the
>> dataset empty? As I plan to implement this, my fitness function will
>> understand the data domain and feedback to the algorithm based on it's
>> search of the parameter space. The way CILib seems to be written it
>> expects
>> the user to pass the test data into it.
>
> Hi David,
>
> You do not need to pass your test data to CILib. The framework will pass
> candidate solutions to
> net.sourceforge.cilib.problem.OptimisationProblem.getFitness(), wherein
> you
> are responsible for calculating the Fitness in whatever way is most
> appropriate for your problem. Thus, only your OptimisationProblem
> specialisation need have access to your dataset and know how to measure
> the
> candidate solution against your data.
>
> As far as the search space is concerned, the framework will determine the
> domain by calling the OptimisationProblem.getDomain() method, wherein you
> must construct an appropriate DomainRegistry that describes your problem
> space.
>
> The DomainParser can be used to convert a string description of your
> search
> space (as described by Gary in a previous email) into an appropriate built
> repsentation (ie. a net.sourcefoge.cilib.type.types.Type representation).
> Refer to net.sourceforge.cilib.functions.Function for an example of this.
> Of
> course, there is nothing preventing you building your own Type
> representation
> either, if it's easier to map that onto your internal representation
> instead.
>
> Hope that helps...
>
> Gary, just thinking aloud here... I don't think the setDomain() method in
> Function is the most appropriate place to parse domain strings. Shouldn't
> this logic rather be pushed down into a specialisation of DomainRegistry,
> say
> StringBasedDomainRegistry which accepts the domain string in its
> constructor?
>
> Then, the domain registry interface need only expose the
> getBuiltRepresentation() method which is used by the framework, and
> Funtion
> can return a new StringBasedDomainRegistry instead. This would encapsulate
> domain building from strings more cleanly in its own class and enable
> people
> like David to define his own mapping from problems to an appropriate
> "built
> representation" more intuitively as another subclass of DomainRegistry.
>
> Regards,
> Edwin Peer
>
> --
> #include http://www.peer.co.za/~espeer/disclaimer.html
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Cilib-users mailing list
> Cil...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cilib-users
>