CALL FOR ENTRIES FOR 2011 HUMIES

 

$10,000 in PRIZES AT

THE 8^th ANNUAL (2011) “HUMIES” AWARDS

FOR HUMAN-COMPETITIVE RESULTS

PRODUCED BY GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION

HELD AT THE

GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE (GECCO)

ON JULY 12–16, 2011 IN DUBLIN, IRELAND

Last updated October 12, 2011

CALL FOR ENTRIES

Techniques of genetic and evolutionary computation are being increasingly applied to difficult real-world problems — often yielding results that are not merely academically interesting, but competitive with the work done by creative and inventive humans. Starting at the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO) in Seattle in 2004, cash prizes have been awarded for human-competitive results that had been produced by some form of genetic and evolutionary computation in the previous year. 

Entries are hereby solicited for awards totaling $10,000 for the 2011 awards for human-competitive results that have been produced by any form of genetic and evolutionary computation (including, but not limited to genetic algorithms, genetic programming, evolution strategies, evolutionary programming, learning classifier systems, grammatical evolution, gene expression programming, differential evolution, etc.) and that have been published in the open literature between the deadline for the previous competition and the deadline for the current competition.

This prize competition is based on published results. The publication may be a paper at the GECCO conference (i.e., regular paper, poster paper, or any other full-length paper), a paper published anywhere in the open literature (e.g., another conference, journal, technical report, thesis, book chapter, book), or a paper in final form that has been unconditionally accepted by a publication and is actually and unconditionally “in press” (that is, the entry must be identical to something that will be published imminently).  The publication may not be an intermediate or draft version that is still subject to change or revision by the authors or editors. The publication must meet the usual standards of a scientific publication in that is must clearly describe a problem, the methods used to address the problem, the results obtained, and sufficient information to enable the work described to be replicated by an independent person.

An automatically created result is considered “human-competitive” if it satisfies at least one of the eight criteria below.

(A) The result was patented as an invention in the past, is an improvement over a patented invention, or would qualify today as a patentable new invention.

(B) The result is equal to or better than a result that was accepted as a new scientific result at the time when it was published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

(C) The result is equal to or better than a result that was placed into a database or archive of results maintained by an internationally recognized panel of scientific experts.

(D) The result is publishable in its own right as a new scientific result ¾ independent of the fact that the result was mechanically created.

(E) The result is equal to or better than the most recent human-created solution to a long-standing problem for which there has been a succession of increasingly better human-created solutions.

(F) The result is equal to or better than a result that was considered an achievement in its field at the time it was first discovered.

(G) The result solves a problem of indisputable difficulty in its field.

(H) The result holds its own or wins a regulated competition involving human contestants (in the form of either live human players or human-written computer programs).

Contestants should note that a pervasive thread in most of the above eight criteria is the notion that the result satisfy an “arms length” standard—not a yardstick based on the opinion of the author, the author’s own institution (educational or corporate), the author’s own close associates. “Arms length” may be established in numerous ways. For example, if the result is a solution to “a long-standing problem for which there has been a succession of increasingly better human-created solutions,” it is clear that the scientific community (not the author, the author’s own institution, or the author’s close associates) have vetted the significance of the problem. Similarly, a problem’s significance may be established if the result replicates or improves upon a scientific result published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, replicates or improves upon a previously patented invention, constitutes a patentable new invention, or replicates or improves a result that was considered an achievement in its field at the time it was first discovered. Similarly, a problem’s significance may be established if the result holds its own or wins a regulated competition involving live human players or human-written computer programs. In each of the foregoing examples, the standard for human-competitiveness is being established external to the author, the author’s own institution, or the author’s close associates. It is also conceivable to rely only on criterion G (“The result solves a problem of indisputable difficulty in its field”); however, if only criterion G is claimed, there must be a clear and convincing argument that the problem’s “difficulty” is ‘indisputable.” 

Cash prizes of $5,000 (gold), $3,000 (silver), and bronze (either one prize of $2,000 or two prizes of $1,000) will be awarded for the best entries that satisfy the criteria for human-competitiveness. The awards will be divided equally among co-authors unless the authors specify a different division at the time of submission.  Prizes are paid by check in U.S. dollars. 

The competition will be held as part of the 2011 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO) conference. Presentations of entries will be made at the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO). The awards and prizes will be announced and presented during the GECCO conference.

IMPORTANT DATES

Monday June 6, 2011 — Deadline for entries (consisting of one TEXT file and one or more PDF files) are due by e-mail

Monday June 27, 2011 — Finalists will be notified by e-mail

Wednesday July 6, 2011 — Finalists must submit their presentation (e.g., PowerPoint, PDF) for posting on competition web site

July 12–16, 2011  — Dates for the 2011 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO) conference

Thursday July 14, 2011 (TENTATIVE) — Presentations at lunch before judging committee at public session at GECCO conference

Friday July 15, 2011 (TENTATIVE) — Presentations at lunch before judging committee at public session at GECCO conference

Saturday July 16, 2011 (TENTATIVE) — Announcement of awards at morning plenary session of GECCO conference 

If you plan to make an entry into this competition, please check the web site at www.human-competitive.org for updated information just prior to submitting your entry (in case there is new information posted).  If you make an entry, please re-check this web site periodically prior to the conference for additional (and possible changing) information and instructions. 

JUDGING COMMITTEE

The judging committee is:

· Wolfgang Banzhaf

· Erik Goodman

· Darrell Whitley

DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS FOR ENTERING THE “HUMIES”

If you plan to make an entry into this competition, please check the web site at www.human-competitive.org for updated information prior to submitting your entry. If you make an entry, please re-check this web site periodically prior to the conference for additional (and possible changing) information and instructions.

The deadline for entries is Monday June 6, 2011.

All entries are to be sent electronically to koza at human-competitive dot org.  All entries will be promptly acknowledged, so please make an inquiry if you do not receive a prompt acknowledgment. 

An entry must consist of one TEXT file and one or more PDF files.  If the same authors are making multiple entries, please submit separate e-mails, each containing both the TEXT and PDF file(s) supporting the entry.

The TEXT file must contain the following nine items. Please be very careful to include ALL required information. Contestants are alerted to the fact that items 6 and 9 are especially important and will be the main basis by which entries will be judged. 

(1) the complete title of one (or more) paper(s) published in the open literature describing the work that the author claims describes a human-competitive result,

(2) the name, complete physical mailing address, e-mail address, and phone number of EACH author of EACH paper,

(3) the name of the corresponding author (i.e., the author to whom notices will be sent concerning the competition),

(4) the abstract of the paper(s),

(5) a list containing one or more of the eight letters (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, or H) that correspond to the criteria (see above) that the author claims that the work satisfies,

(6) a statement stating why the result satisfies the criteria that the contestant claims (see examples of statements of human-competitiveness as a guide to aid in constructing this part of the submission),

(7) a full citation of the paper (that is, author names; publication date; name of journal, conference, technical report, thesis, book, or book chapter; name of editors, if applicable, of the journal or edited book; publisher name; publisher city; page numbers, if applicable);

(8) a statement either that “any prize money, if any, is to be divided equally among the co-authors” OR a specific percentage breakdown as to how the prize money, if any, is to be divided among the co-authors; and

(9) a statement stating why the judges should consider the entry as “best” in comparison to other entries that may also be “human-competitive.”

The PDF file(s) are to contain the paper(s). The strongly preferred method is that you send a separate PDF file for each of your paper(s) relating to your entry. Both the text file and the PDF file(s) for each entry will be permanently posted on a web page shortly after the deadline date for entries (for use by the judges, conference attendees, and anyone else who is interested) and will remain posted on the web as a permanent record of the competition. If your paper is available on your publisher’s web site and your publisher specifically requires that your published paper may only appear only on your own personal page, the second choice is that you send link(s) to a separate web page on your web site containing link(s) to the PDF file(s) of the paper(s) that constitute your entry. This separate web page is to contain  nothing else, so the interested parties may quickly locate your paper(s). If you use this second-choice option, you must ALSO supply a link to a permanent web site maintained by your publisher where your specific paper may be viewed or purchased (that is, not a link merely to the publisher’s general home page, but a link to the specific web page containing your paper on the publisher’s site). The objective, in each case, is to provide a permanent record of the entries and to make it easy for anyone to locate the entries.

The judging committee will  review all entries and identify a short list of approximately 6–10  finalists for presentation at the GECCO conference. Finalists will be notified by Monday June 27, 2011 by an e-mail to the corresponding author. Please acknowledge receipt of this message, so the judges know that you received notice. Finalists must then make a short presentation to the judging committee at a public session of the GECCO conference. The presentations will be held on one of the early days of the conference and the winners will be announced a day or two later.

Finalists must submit a presentation in the form of a PowerPoint file or a PDF file by Wednesday July 6, 2011 by e-mail to koza at human-competitive dot org. All submissions will be promptly acknowledged, so please make an inquiry if you do not receive a prompt acknowledgment. These presentations will be added to the web page for the competition so that the judging committee (and conference attendees and anyone else who is interested) may preview the submissions prior to the oral presentations.

At the GECCO conference, there will be short oral presentations by the finalists to the judging committee. The amount of time available will depend on the number of finalists and will be announced, but will in the neighborhood of 8 to 15 minutes. The presentations will be open to all conference attendees at a special session of the conference (about 2 hours). The oral presentation should primarily focus on

(1) why the result qualifies as being human-competitive and

(2) why the judges should consider the entry as “best” in comparison to other entries that may also be “human-competitive” since, as previously mentioned, these are the two main standards by which entries will be judged by the judges. 

In this necessarily short oral presentation to the judges, a description of the work itself should be decidedly secondary.  By the time of the presentation the judges (and any interested conference attendees) will have had the opportunity to read and study the actual papers.  Thus, the focus of the presentation is on reasons why the work being presented should win a prize — not an explanation or presentation of the work itself. The entries will be presented in the order that they appear in the table that will be announced.  In the unlikely event that a presenter is already scheduled to make a presentation elsewhere in the GECCO conference at the same time, please notify the judging committee immediately, so we can arrange an exchange of time slots. After the oral presentations, the award committee will meet and consider the presentations.

The presenting author for each entry must register for the GECCO conference.

Authors generally enter their own work; however, a person may make an entry on behalf of someone else; however, the entry must be complete in every respect and the entry must be made with the consent of the actual authors (one of whom must be willing to make a presentation of their work).

No prize may be awarded to anyone closely associated with any member of the judging committee (e.g., academic advisor, collaborator on funded research, co-author of the work involved) or the company donating the prize funds (i.e., Third Millennium On-Line Products Inc.). 

· For information about the annual Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO) operated by the Association for Computing Special Interest Group on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (SIGEVO)

· For information about the annual Human-Competitive Awards (the “humies”) in genetic and evolutionary computation offered at the annual Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO)

· The home page of Genetic Programming Inc. at www.genetic-programming.com.

· The home page of John R. Koza (including online versions of most published papers)

· For information about John Koza’s course on genetic algorithms and genetic programming at Stanford University

· For information about Electoral College reform and National Popular Vote

· Information about the 1992 book Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means of Natural Selection, the 1994 book Genetic Programming II: Automatic Discovery of Reusable Programs, the 1999 book Genetic Programming III: Darwinian Invention and Problem Solving, and the 2003 book Genetic Programming IV: Routine Human-Competitive Machine Intelligence. Click here to read chapter 1 of Genetic Programming IV book in PDF format.

· 5,000+ published papers on genetic programming in a searchable bibliography (with many on-line versions of papers) by over 880 authors maintained by William Langdon’s and Steven M. Gustafson.

· For information on the Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines journal

· For information on the Genetic Programming book series, see the Call For Book Proposals