Alexandre D. Jesus
ABSTRACT
Anytime algorithms for optimization problems are of particular interest since they allow to trade off execution time with result quality. However, the selection of the best anytime algorithm for a given problem instance has been focused on a particular budget for execution time or particular target result quality. Moreover, it is often assumed that these anytime preferences are known when developing or training the algorithm selection methodology. In this work, we study the algorithm selection problem in a context where the decision maker's anytime preferences are defined by a general utility function, and only known at the time of selection. To this end, we first examine how to measure the performance of an anytime algorithm with respect to this utility function. Then, we discuss approaches for the development of selection methodologies that receive a utility function as an argument at the time of selection. Then, to illustrate one of the discussed approaches, we present a preliminary study on the selection between an exact and a heuristic algorithm for a bi-objective knapsack problem. The results show that the proposed methodology has an accuracy greater than 96% in the selected scenarios, but we identify room for improvement.
- Cristina Bazgan, Hadrien Hugot, and Daniel Vanderpooten. 2009. Solving efficiently the 0-1 multi-objective knapsack problem. Computers & Operations Research 36, 1 (Jan. 2009), 260--279. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Marco Chiarandini. 2005. Stochastic Local Search Methods for Highly Constrained Combinatorial Optimisation Problems. Ph.D. Dissertation. Technical University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
- Fabio Daolio, Arnaud Liefooghe, Sébastien Verel, Hernán Aguirre, and Kiyoshi Tanaka. 2017. Problem Features versus Algorithm Performance on Rugged Multiobjective Combinatorial Fitness Landscapes. Evolutionary Computation 25, 4 (Winter 2017), 555--585. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomas L. Dean and Mark S. Boddy. 1988. An Analysis of Time-Dependent Planning. In Proceedings of the Seventh AAAI National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'88). AAAI Press, 49--54.Google Scholar
- Jérémie Dubois-Lacoste, Manuel López-Ibáñez, and Thomas Stützle. 2015. Anytime Pareto local search. European Journal of Operational Research 243, 2 (June 2015), 369--385. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Matthias Ehrgott. 2005. Multicriteria Optimization (2nd ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Google ScholarCross Ref
- José Rui Figueira, Luís Paquete, Marco Simões, and Daniel Vanderpooten. 2013. Algorithmic improvements on dynamic programming for the bi-objective {0, 1} knapsack problem. Computational Optimization and Applications 56, 1 (Sept. 2013), 97--111. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Viviane Grunert da Fonseca, Carlos M. Fonseca, and Andreia O. Hall. 2001. Inferential Performance Assessment of Stochastic Optimisers and the Attainment Function. In Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2001). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 213--225. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Holger H. Hoos and Thomas Stützle. 2005. Stochastic Local Search: Foundations & Applications. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pascal Kerschke, Holger H. Hoos, Frank Neumann, and Heike Trautmann. 2019. Automated Algorithm Selection: Survey and Perspectives. Evolutionary Computation 27, 1 (Spring 2019), 3--45. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lars Kotthoff. 2016. Algorithm Selection for Combinatorial Search Problems: A Survey. In Data Mining and Constraint Programming. Springer, Cham, 149--190. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kevin Leyton-Brown, Eugene Nudelman, Galen Andrew, Jim McFadden, and Yoav Shoham. 2003. A Portfolio Approach to Algorithm Selection. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-03). 1542--1543.Google Scholar
- Arnaud Liefooghe, Luís Paquete, Marco Simões, and José R. Figueira. 2011. Connectedness and Local Search for Bicriteria Knapsack Problems. In Evolutionary Computation in Combinatorial Optimization (EvoCOP 2011). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 48--59. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Manuel López-Ibáñez, Luís Paquete, and Thomas Stützle. 2010. Exploratory Analysis of Stochastic Local Search Algorithms in Biobjective Optimization. In Experimental Methods for the Analysis of Optimization Algorithms. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 209--222. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Manuel López-Ibáñez and Thomas Stützle. 2014. Automatically improving the anytime behaviour of optimisation algorithms. European Journal of Operational Research 235, 3 (June 2014), 569--582. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Luis Paquete, Tommaso Schiavinotto, and Thomas Stützle. 2007. On local optima in multiobjective combinatorial optimization problems. Annals of Operations Research 156 (Aug. 2007), 83--97. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sergey Polyakovskiy, Mohammad Reza Bonyadi, Markus Wagner, Zbigniew Michalewicz, and Frank Neumann. 2014. A comprehensive benchmark set and heuristics for the traveling thief problem. In Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 477--484. Google ScholarDigital Library
- John R. Rice. 1976. The Algorithm Selection Problem. In Advances in Computers. Vol. 15. Elsevier, 65--118. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Matheus Guedes Vilas Boas, Haroldo Gambini Santos, Luiz Henrique de Campos Merschmann, and Greet Vanden Berghe. 2019. Optimal decision trees for the algorithm selection problem: integer programming based approaches. International Transactions in Operational Research (Sept. 2019). Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lin Xu, Frank Hutter, Holger H. Hoos, and Kevin Leyton-Brown. 2008. SATzilla: Portfolio-based Algorithm Selection for SAT. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 32 (June 2008), 565--606. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shlomo Zilberstein. 1996. Using Anytime Algorithms in Intelligent Systems. AI Magazine 17, 3 (Fall 1996), 73--83. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Eckart Zitzler. 1998. Evolutionary Algorithms for Multiobjective Optimization: Methods and Applications. Ph.D. Dissertation. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich.Google Scholar
- Eckart Zitzler, Lothar Thiele, Marco Laumanns, Carlos M. Fonseca, and Viviane Grunert da Fonseca. 2003. Performance Assessment of Multiobjective Optimizers: An Analysis and Review. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 7, 2 (April 2003), 117--132. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Algorithm selection of anytime algorithms
Recommendations
Anytime algorithms for speech parsing?
COLING '94: Proceedings of the 15th conference on Computational linguistics - Volume 2This paper discusses to which extent the concept of "anytime algorithms" can be applied to parsing algorithms with feature unification. We first try to give a more precise definition of what an anytime algorithm is. We arque that parsing algorithms have ...
Interruptible anytime algorithms for iterative improvement of decision trees
UBDM '05: Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on Utility-based data miningFinding a minimal decision tree consistent with the examples is an NP-complete problem. Therefore, most of the existing algorithms for decision tree induction use a greedy approach based on local heuristics. These algorithms usually require a fixed ...
Algorithm selection for software validation based on graph kernels
AbstractAlgorithm selection is the task of choosing an algorithm from a given set of candidate algorithms when faced with a particular problem instance. Algorithm selection via machine learning (ML) has recently been successfully applied for various ...
Comments