Comparing Algorithm Selection Approaches on Black-Box Optimization Problems

被引:5
|
作者
Kostovska, Ana [1 ]
Jankovic, Anja [2 ]
Vermetten, Diederick [3 ]
Dzeroski, Saso [1 ]
Eftimov, Tome [1 ]
Doerr, Carola [2 ]
机构
[1] Jozef Stefan Inst, Ljubljana, Slovenia
[2] Sorbonne Univ, LIP6, Paris, France
[3] Leiden Univ, LIACS, Leiden, Netherlands
关键词
D O I
10.1145/3583133.3590697
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Performance complementarity of solvers available to tackle blackbox optimization problems gives rise to the important task of algorithm selection (AS). Automated AS approaches can help replace tedious and labor-intensive manual selection, and have already shown promising performance in various optimization domains. Automated AS relies on machine learning (ML) techniques to recommend the best algorithm given the information about the problem instance. Unfortunately, there are no clear guidelines for choosing the most appropriate one from a variety of ML techniques. Treebased models such as Random Forest or XGBoost have consistently demonstrated outstanding performance for automated AS. Transformers and other tabular deep learning models have also been increasingly applied in this context. We investigate in this work the impact of the choice of the ML technique on AS performance. We compare four ML models on the task of predicting the best solver for the BBOB problems for 7 different runtime budgets in 2 dimensions. While our results confirm that a per-instance AS has indeed impressive potential, we also show that the particular choice of the ML technique is of much minor importance.
引用
收藏
页码:495 / 498
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Algorithm selection for black-box continuous optimization problems: A survey on methods and challenges
    Munoz, Mario A.
    Sun, Yuan
    Kirley, Michael
    Halgamuge, Saman K.
    INFORMATION SCIENCES, 2015, 317 : 224 - 245
  • [2] Sampling Effects on Algorithm Selection for Continuous Black-Box Optimization
    Munoz, Mario Andres
    Kirley, Michael
    ALGORITHMS, 2021, 14 (01)
  • [3] Metaheuristic algorithm selection system for continuous black-box optimization problems based on collaborative filtering
    Zhang Y.-W.
    Wang L.
    Zhang, Yong-Wei (ywzhang@just.edu.cn), 1600, Northeast University (35): : 1297 - 1306
  • [4] Deterministic approaches for solving practical black-box global optimization problems
    Kvasov, Dmitri E.
    Sergeyev, Yaroslav D.
    ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING SOFTWARE, 2015, 80 : 58 - 66
  • [5] SCR, an efficient global optimization algorithm for constrained black-box problems
    Zaryab, Syed Ali
    Manno, Andrea
    Martelli, Emanuele
    OPTIMIZATION AND ENGINEERING, 2025,
  • [6] Adaptive sampling Bayesian algorithm for constrained black-box optimization problems
    Fan, Shuyuan
    Hong, Xiaodong
    Liao, Zuwei
    Ren, Congjing
    Yang, Yao
    Wang, Jingdai
    Yang, Yongrong
    AICHE JOURNAL, 2025, 71 (04)
  • [7] Impact of Training Instance Selection on Automated Algorithm Selection Models for Numerical Black-box OptimizationImpact of Training Instance Selection on Automated Algorithm Selection Models for Numerical Black-box Optimization
    Dietrich, Konstantin
    Vermetten, Diederick
    Doerr, Carola
    Kerschke, Pascal
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2024 GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE, GECCO 2024, 2024, : 1007 - 1016
  • [8] PS-AAS: Portfolio Selection for Automated Algorithm Selection in Black-Box Optimization
    Kostovska, Ana
    Cenikj, Gjorgjina
    Vermetten, Diederick
    Jankovic, Anja
    Nikolikj, Ana
    Skvorc, Urban
    Korosec, Peter
    Doerr, Carola
    Eftimov, Tome
    INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON AUTOMATED MACHINE LEARNING, VOL 224, 2023, 224
  • [9] AUTOMATIC SURROGATE MODEL TYPE SELECTION DURING THE OPTIMIZATION OF EXPENSIVE BLACK-BOX PROBLEMS
    Couckuyt, Ivo
    De Turck, Filip
    Dhaene, Tom
    Gorissen, Dirk
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2011 WINTER SIMULATION CONFERENCE (WSC), 2011, : 4269 - 4279
  • [10] Implicitly and densely discrete black-box optimization problems
    Vicente, Luis Nunes
    OPTIMIZATION LETTERS, 2009, 3 (03) : 475 - 482