Symbolic regression via genetic programming routinely fails on small, wide datasets - a regime common in clinical-trial monitoring, biostatistics, and engineering pilot studies - by converging on bloated, overfit expressions that exploit correlation rather than prediction. We present Evolutional Math, an open-source genetic programming system that combines four design choices to yield compact, interpretable formulas in this regime. First, fitness is measured by R-squared on held-out cross-validation folds rather than Pearson correlation on the training set, eliminating single-variable shortcuts that correlate but mis-scale. Second, a multi-island architecture runs independent populations seeded with distinct operator subsets (algebraic, logarithmic, trigonometric, and full) with ring-topology migration every M generations, preventing the search from collapsing into one region of formula space. Third, a structural deduplication scheme treats formulas differing only in constants as equivalent, so the elite archive contains structurally distinct candidates rather than near-duplicate variants. Fourth, top-k individuals undergo numerical constant refinement via scipy L-BFGS-B after each migration phase, decoupling structure search from parameter fitting. We evaluate the system on synthetic benchmarks of the form log(x_i) * x_j / (x_k * c), trigonometric mixtures, and an anonymized clinical site-monitoring dataset with 24 rows and approximately 290 candidate numeric features. The system consistently recovers compact ground-truth structures with R-squared at or above 0.99 within tens of thousands of unique formula evaluations. A reference implementation is released under a noncommercial source-available license.
Symbolic regression with genetic programming (GPSR) may suffer from overfitting and structural bloat, especially when noise is present. In this paper we evaluate description length (DL) and fractional Bayes factor (FBF) criteria as principled, data-efficient alternatives to heuristics for selecting compact expressions that generalise well. We implement DL using a Fisher-information-based parameter encoding and compare it to AIC and BIC across multiple datasets, including noisy synthetic benchmarks and real-world regression problems. We study three search/selection strategies: (i) multi-objective search for accuracy and program length followed by DL/FBF selection; (ii) multi-objective search using DL directly as an objective; and (iii) single-objective optimisation with DL/FBF as the fitness. Across datasets we find that DL/FBF post-selection improves test performance compared to AIC/BIC baseline and that BIC in combination with the same function complexity penalty from DL/FBF produces similar results. In contrast, using DL/FBF directly as a fitness function in single-objective GPSR frequently induces premature convergence to overly simple models. We conclude with practical guidance for using DL/FBF as robust model-selection tools in genetic programming workflows.
Gabriel Kronberger, Fabricio Olivetti de Franca, Deaglan J. Bartlett +2
We analyze the effect of optimizing the initial population of genetic programming (GP) for symbolic regression (SR) on the accuracy and complexity of solutions. We compare three well-established random initialization methods as well as initialization with small optimized solutions from exhaustive symbolic regression (ESR) using a GP/SR implementation which is based on the multi-objective evolutionary algorithm NSGA-II. We compare the final Pareto fronts found with each initialization method on twelve synthetic problems of varying complexity and one real-world dataset. We find no significant differences in accuracy or model complexity among the initialization methods. The initial advantage of initialization with ESR disappears after only a few generations. Our results show that, given similar diversity in the initial population, the effect of the initialization method in GP-based symbolic regression on the final Pareto front is negligible.
Lukas Kammerer, Gabriel Kronberger, Deaglan J. Bartlett +3
Genetic Programming and its variants, such as grammatical evolution, are widely used in Symbolic Regression to derive mathematical expressions from multivariate data. In addition to predictive accuracy, models are appreciated for their potential to provide interpretability, offering explicit equations that relate input variables to outcomes. However, achieving interpretability and plausibility remains challenging, as evolved models may be complex or scientifically inconsistent. In this study, we explore whether Large Language Models, can assist in improving the explainability of Symbolic Regression models generated by evolutionary computation methods. Building upon our previous work on estimating body fat percentage using grammar-based Genetic Programming , we investigate the use of LLMs as post-processing tools to analyze and rank evolved expressions according to their interpretability and medical plausibility. Four symbolic expressions are analysed by three LLMs over three repeated runs, and the resulting interpretations and rankings are assessed by a panel of three clinicians. Across the three LLMs, comparative model-ranking outputs received more favorable clinician assessments than isolated term-level interpretations. However, the LLMs also produced physiologically and mathematically questionable explanations, indicating that they are better suited to comparative auditing under expert oversight than to autonomous validation.\blfootnote{The present work is an extended version of a paper submitted into a journal.
Jorge López-Varela, J. Ignacio Hidalgo, José-Manuel Muñoz +6