Improving Monte Carlo Tree Search for Symbolic Regression
Zhengyao Huang, Daniel Huang, Tiannan Xiao, Dina Ma, Zhenyu Ming, Hao Shi, Yuanhui Wen
Abstract
Symbolic regression aims to discover concise, interpretable mathematical expressions that satisfy desired objectives, such as fitting data, posing a highly combinatorial optimization problem. While genetic programming has been the dominant approach, recent efforts have explored reinforcement learning methods for improving search efficiency. Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS), with its ability to balance exploration and exploitation through guided search, has emerged as a promising technique for symbolic expression discovery. However, its traditional bandit strategies and sequential symbol construction often limit performance. In this work, we propose an improved MCTS framework for symbolic regression that addresses these limitations through two key innovations: (1) an extreme bandit allocation strategy tailored for identifying globally optimal expressions, with finite-time performance guarantees under polynomial reward decay assumptions; and (2) evolution-inspired state-jumping actions such as mutation and crossover, which enable non-local transitions to promising regions of the search space. These state-jumping actions also reshape the reward landscape during the search process, improving both robustness and efficiency. We conduct a thorough numerical study to the impact of these improvements and benchmark our approach against existing symbolic regression methods on a variety of datasets, including both ground-truth and black-box datasets. Our approach achieves competitive performance with state-of-the-art libraries in terms of recovery rate, attains favorable positions on the Pareto frontier of accuracy versus model complexity. Code is available at https://github.com/PKU-CMEGroup/MCTS-4-SR.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on10
- Deep symbolic regression: Recovering mathematical expressions from data via risk-seeking policy gradientsBrenden K. Petersen, Mikel Landajuela, T. Nathan Mundhenk, Cláudio Prata Santiago et al.ICLR 2021 · 444 citations
- End-to-end Symbolic Regression with TransformersPierre-Alexandre Kamienny, Stéphane d'Ascoli, Guillaume Lample, François ChartonNeurIPS 2022 · 320 citations
- Neural Symbolic Regression that scalesLuca Biggio, Tommaso Bendinelli, Alexander Neitz, Aurélien Lucchi et al.ICML 2021 · 251 citations
- A Unified Framework for Deep Symbolic RegressionMikel Landajuela, Chak Shing Lee, Jiachen Yang, Ruben Glatt et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 160 citations
- Transformer-based Planning for Symbolic RegressionParshin Shojaee, Kazem Meidani, Amir Barati Farimani, Chandan K. ReddyNeurIPS 2023 · 116 citations
Related papers
- Deep Generative Symbolic Regression with Monte-Carlo-Tree-SearchPierre-Alexandre Kamienny, Guillaume Lample, Sylvain Lamprier, Marco VirgolinICML 2023 · 50 citations
- Graph-based Symbolic Regression with Invariance and Constraint EncodingZiyu Xiang, Kenna Ashen, Xiaofeng Qian, Xiaoning QianNeurIPS 2025 · 5 citations
- Symbolic Regression via Deep Reinforcement Learning Enhanced Genetic Programming SeedingT. Nathan Mundhenk, Mikel Landajuela, Ruben Glatt, Cláudio P. Santiago et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 95 citations
- Reinforcement Symbolic Regression MachineYilong Xu, Yang Liu, Hao SunICLR 2024 · 17 citations
- Racing Control Variable Genetic Programming for Symbolic RegressionNan Jiang, Yexiang XueAAAI 2024 · 7 citations
