Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-3 of 3
Holger H. Hoos
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 (2019) 27 (1): 3–45.
Published: 01 March 2019
FIGURES
| View All (4)
Abstract
View article
PDF
It has long been observed that for practically any computational problem that has been intensely studied, different instances are best solved using different algorithms. This is particularly pronounced for computationally hard problems, where in most cases, no single algorithm defines the state of the art; instead, there is a set of algorithms with complementary strengths. This performance complementarity can be exploited in various ways, one of which is based on the idea of selecting, from a set of given algorithms, for each problem instance to be solved the one expected to perform best. The task of automatically selecting an algorithm from a given set is known as the per-instance algorithm selection problem and has been intensely studied over the past 15 years, leading to major improvements in the state of the art in solving a growing number of discrete combinatorial problems, including propositional satisfiability and AI planning. Per-instance algorithm selection also shows much promise for boosting performance in solving continuous and mixed discrete/continuous optimisation problems. This survey provides an overview of research in automated algorithm selection, ranging from early and seminal works to recent and promising application areas. Different from earlier work, it covers applications to discrete and continuous problems, and discusses algorithm selection in context with conceptually related approaches, such as algorithm configuration, scheduling, or portfolio selection. Since informative and cheaply computable problem instance features provide the basis for effective per-instance algorithm selection systems, we also provide an overview of such features for discrete and continuous problems. Finally, we provide perspectives on future work in the area and discuss a number of open research challenges.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Evolutionary Computation (2019) 27 (1): 147–171.
Published: 01 March 2019
FIGURES
| View All (6)
Abstract
View article
PDF
Automatic algorithm configuration (AAC) is becoming a key ingredient in the design of high-performance solvers for challenging optimisation problems. However, most existing work on AAC deals with configuration procedures that optimise a single performance metric of a given, single-objective algorithm. Of course, these configurators can also be used to optimise the performance of multi-objective algorithms, as measured by a single performance indicator. In this work, we demonstrate that better results can be obtained by using a native, multi-objective algorithm configuration procedure. Specifically, we compare three AAC approaches: one considering only the hypervolume indicator, a second optimising the weighted sum of hypervolume and spread, and a third that simultaneously optimises these complementary indicators, using a genuinely multi-objective approach. We assess these approaches by applying them to a highly-parametric local search framework for two widely studied multi-objective optimisation problems, the bi-objective permutation flowshop and travelling salesman problems. Our results show that multi-objective algorithms are indeed best configured using a multi-objective configurator.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Evolutionary Computation (2018) 26 (4): 597–620.
Published: 01 December 2018
FIGURES
| View All (6)
Abstract
View article
PDF
The Travelling Salesperson Problem (TSP) is one of the best-studied NP-hard problems. Over the years, many different solution approaches and solvers have been developed. For the first time, we directly compare five state-of-the-art inexact solvers—namely, LKH, EAX, restart variants of those, and MAOS—on a large set of well-known benchmark instances and demonstrate complementary performance, in that different instances may be solved most effectively by different algorithms. We leverage this complementarity to build an algorithm selector, which selects the best TSP solver on a per-instance basis and thus achieves significantly improved performance compared to the single best solver, representing an advance in the state of the art in solving the Euclidean TSP. Our in-depth analysis of the selectors provides insight into what drives this performance improvement.