Are metaheuristics worth it? A computational comparison between nature-inspired and deterministic techniques on black-box optimization problems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2212.06875v1
• Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 19:44:24 GMT
• Title: Are metaheuristics worth it? A computational comparison between nature-inspired and deterministic techniques on black-box optimization problems
• Authors: Jakub Kudela
• Abstract summary: In this paper, we provide an extensive computational comparison of selected methods from each of these branches. The results showed that, when dealing with situations where the objective function evaluations are relatively cheap, the nature-inspired methods have a significantly better performance than their deterministic counterparts.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In the field of derivative-free optimization, both of its main branches, the deterministic and nature-inspired techniques, experienced in recent years substantial advancement. In this paper, we provide an extensive computational comparison of selected methods from each of these branches. The chosen representatives were either standard and well-utilized methods, or the best-performing methods from recent numerical comparisons. The computational comparison was performed on five different benchmark sets and the results were analyzed in terms of performance, time complexity, and convergence properties of the selected methods. The results showed that, when dealing with situations where the objective function evaluations are relatively cheap, the nature-inspired methods have a significantly better performance than their deterministic counterparts. However, in situations when the function evaluations are costly or otherwise prohibited, the deterministic methods might provide more consistent and overall better results.

Related papers

• Bayesian Optimization for Non-Convex Two-Stage Stochastic Optimization Problems [2.9016548477524156]
  We formulate a knowledgeient-based acquisition function to jointly optimize the first and second-stage variables. We show that differences in the dimension and length scales between the variable types can lead to inefficiencies of the twostep algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-30T16:26:31Z)
• Comparison of Single- and Multi- Objective Optimization Quality for Evolutionary Equation Discovery [77.34726150561087]
  Evolutionary differential equation discovery proved to be a tool to obtain equations with less a priori assumptions. The proposed comparison approach is shown on classical model examples -- Burgers equation, wave equation, and Korteweg - de Vries equation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-29T15:37:19Z)
• Best Arm Identification in Stochastic Bandits: Beyond $\beta-$optimality [31.359578768463752]
  This paper investigates a hitherto unaddressed aspect of best arm identification (BAI) in multi-armed bandits in the fixed-confidence setting. Two key metrics for assessing bandit algorithms are computational efficiency and performance optimality. This paper introduces a framework and an algorithm for BAI that achieves optimal performance with a computationally efficient set of decision rules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-10T05:02:49Z)
• Prasatul Matrix: A Direct Comparison Approach for Analyzing Evolutionary Optimization Algorithms [2.1320960069210475]
  Direct comparison approach is proposed to analyze the performance of evolutionary optimization algorithms. Five different performance measures are designed based on the prasatul matrix to evaluate the performance of algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-01T17:21:44Z)
• Compactness Score: A Fast Filter Method for Unsupervised Feature Selection [66.84571085643928]
  We propose a fast unsupervised feature selection method, named as, Compactness Score (CSUFS) to select desired features. Our proposed algorithm seems to be more accurate and efficient compared with existing algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-31T13:01:37Z)
• Benchmarking Simulation-Based Inference [5.3898004059026325]
  Recent advances in probabilistic modelling have led to a large number of simulation-based inference algorithms which do not require numerical evaluation of likelihoods. We provide a benchmark with inference tasks and suitable performance metrics, with an initial selection of algorithms. We found that the choice of performance metric is critical, that even state-of-the-art algorithms have substantial room for improvement, and that sequential estimation improves sample efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-12T18:31:22Z)
• Fast Rates for Contextual Linear Optimization [52.39202699484225]
  We show that a naive plug-in approach achieves regret convergence rates that are significantly faster than methods that directly optimize downstream decision performance. Our results are overall positive for practice: predictive models are easy and fast to train using existing tools, simple to interpret, and, as we show, lead to decisions that perform very well.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-05T18:43:59Z)
• Stochastic Optimization Forests [60.523606291705214]
  We show how to train forest decision policies by growing trees that choose splits to directly optimize the downstream decision quality, rather than splitting to improve prediction accuracy as in the standard random forest algorithm. We show that our approximate splitting criteria can reduce running time hundredfold, while achieving performance close to forest algorithms that exactly re-optimize for every candidate split.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-17T16:56:06Z)
• Generalized and Scalable Optimal Sparse Decision Trees [56.35541305670828]
  We present techniques that produce optimal decision trees over a variety of objectives. We also introduce a scalable algorithm that produces provably optimal results in the presence of continuous variables.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-15T19:00:11Z)
• Decisions and Performance Under Bounded Rationality: A Computational Benchmarking Approach [0.0]
  This paper presents a novel approach to analyze human decision-making. It involves comparing the behavior of professional chess players relative to a computational benchmark of cognitively bounded rationality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-26T11:39:39Z)
• Learning with Differentiable Perturbed Optimizers [54.351317101356614]
  We propose a systematic method to transform operations into operations that are differentiable and never locally constant. Our approach relies on perturbeds, and can be used readily together with existing solvers. We show how this framework can be connected to a family of losses developed in structured prediction, and give theoretical guarantees for their use in learning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-20T11:11:32Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.