Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-4 of 4
Diederick Vermetten
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Evolutionary Computation 1–28.
Published: 17 October 2024
Abstract
View article
PDF
Modular algorithm frameworks not only allow for combinations never tested in manually selected algorithm portfolios, but they also provide a structured approach to assess which algorithmic ideas are crucial for the observed performance of algorithms. In this study, we propose a methodology for analyzing the impact of the different modules on the overall performance. We consider modular frameworks for two widely used families of derivative-free, black-box optimization algorithms, the covariance matrix adaptation evolution strategy (CMA-ES) and differential evolution (DE). More specifically, we use performance data of 324 modCMA-ES and 576 modDE algorithm variants (with each variant corresponding to a specific configuration of modules) obtained on the 24 BBOB problems for six different runtime budgets in two dimensions. Our analysis of these data reveals that the impact of individual modules on overall algorithm performance varies significantly. Notably, among the examined modules, the elitism module in CMA-ES and the linear population size reduction module in DE exhibit the most significant impact on performance. Furthermore, our exploratory data analysis of problem landscape data suggests that the most relevant landscape features remain consistent regardless of the configuration of individual modules, but the influence that these features have on regression accuracy varies. In addition, we apply classifiers that exploit feature importance with respect to the trained models for performance prediction and performance data, to predict the modular configurations of CMA-ES and DE algorithm variants. The results show that the predicted configurations do not exhibit a statistically significant difference in performance compared to the true configurations, with the percentage varying depending on the setup (from 49.1% to 95.5% for modCMA and 21.7% to 77.1% for DE).
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Evolutionary Computation (2024) 32 (3): 205–210.
Published: 03 September 2024
Abstract
View article
PDF
We present IOHexperimenter, the experimentation module of the IOHprofiler project. IOHexperimenter aims at providing an easy-to-use and customizable toolbox for benchmarking iterative optimization heuristics such as local search, evolutionary and genetic algorithms, and Bayesian optimization techniques. IOHexperimenter can be used as a stand-alone tool or as part of a benchmarking pipeline that uses other modules of the IOHprofiler environment. IOHexperimenter provides an efficient interface between optimization problems and their solvers while allowing for granular logging of the optimization process. Its logs are fully compatible with existing tools for interactive data analysis, which significantly speeds up the deployment of a benchmarking pipeline. The main components of IOHexperimenter are the environment to build customized problem suites and the various logging options that allow users to steer the granularity of the data records.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Evolutionary Computation (2024) 32 (1): 3–48.
Published: 01 March 2024
FIGURES
| View All (13)
Abstract
View article
PDF
We argue that results produced by a heuristic optimisation algorithm cannot be considered reproducible unless the algorithm fully specifies what should be done with solutions generated outside the domain, even in the case of simple bound constraints. Currently, in the field of heuristic optimisation, such specification is rarely mentioned or investigated due to the assumed triviality or insignificance of this question. Here, we demonstrate that, at least in algorithms based on Differential Evolution, this choice induces notably different behaviours in terms of performance, disruptiveness, and population diversity. This is shown theoretically (where possible) for standard Differential Evolution in the absence of selection pressure and experimentally for the standard and state-of-the-art Differential Evolution variants, on a special test function and the BBOB benchmarking suite, respectively. Moreover, we demonstrate that the importance of this choice quickly grows with problem dimensionality. Differential Evolution is not at all special in this regard—there is no reason to presume that other heuristic optimisers are not equally affected by the aforementioned algorithmic choice. Thus, we urge the heuristic optimisation community to formalise and adopt the idea of a new algorithmic component in heuristic optimisers, which we refer to as the strategy of dealing with infeasible solutions. This component needs to be consistently: (a) specified in algorithmic descriptions to guarantee reproducibility of results, (b) studied to better understand its impact on an algorithm's performance in a wider sense (i.e., convergence time, robustness, etc.), and (c) included in the (automatic) design of algorithms. All of these should be done even for problems with bound constraints.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Evolutionary Computation (2023) 31 (2): 81–122.
Published: 01 June 2023
Abstract
View article
PDF
Thirty years, 1993–2023, is a huge time frame in science. We address some major developments in the field of evolutionary algorithms, with applications in parameter optimization, over these 30 years. These include the covariance matrix adaptation evolution strategy and some fast-growing fields such as multimodal optimization, surrogate-assisted optimization, multiobjective optimization, and automated algorithm design. Moreover, we also discuss particle swarm optimization and differential evolution, which did not exist 30 years ago, either. One of the key arguments made in the paper is that we need fewer algorithms, not more, which, however, is the current trend through continuously claiming paradigms from nature that are suggested to be useful as new optimization algorithms. Moreover, we argue that we need proper benchmarking procedures to sort out whether a newly proposed algorithm is useful or not. We also briefly discuss automated algorithm design approaches, including configurable algorithm design frameworks, as the proposed next step toward designing optimization algorithms automatically, rather than by hand.