The performance of automated algorithm selection (AAS) strongly depends on the portfolio of algorithms to choose from. Selecting the portfolio is a non-trivial task that requires balancing the trade-off between the higher flexibility of large portfolios with the increased complexity of the AAS task. In practice, probably the most common way to choose the algorithms for the portfolio is a greedy selection of the algorithms that perform well in some reference tasks of interest. We set out in this work to investigate alternative, data-driven portfolio selection techniques. Our proposed method creates algorithm behavior meta-representations, constructs a graph from a set of algorithms based on their meta-representation similarity, and applies a graph algorithm to select a final portfolio of diverse, representative, and non-redundant algorithms. We evaluate two distinct meta-representation techniques (SHAP and performance2vec) for selecting complementary portfolios from a total of 324 different variants of CMA-ES for the task of optimizing the BBOB single-objective problems in dimensionalities 5 and 30 with different cut-off budgets. We test two types of portfolios: one related to overall algorithm behavior and the `personalized' one (related to algorithm behavior per each problem separately). We observe that the approach built on the performance2vec-based representations favors small portfolios with negligible error in the AAS task relative to the virtual best solver from the selected portfolio, whereas the portfolios built from the SHAP-based representations gain from higher flexibility at the cost of decreased performance of the AAS. Across most considered scenarios, personalized portfolios yield comparable or slightly better performance than the classical greedy approach. They outperform the full portfolio in all scenarios.
In black-box optimization, it is essential to understand why an algorithm instance works on a set of problem instances while failing on others and provide explanations of its behavior. We propose a methodology for formulating an algorithm instance footprint that consists of a set of problem instances that are easy to be solved and a set of problem instances that are difficult to be solved, for an algorithm instance. This behavior of the algorithm instance is further linked to the landscape properties of the problem instances to provide explanations of which properties make some problem instances easy or challenging. The proposed methodology uses meta-representations that embed the landscape properties of the problem instances and the performance of the algorithm into the same vector space. These meta-representations are obtained by training a supervised machine learning regression model for algorithm performance prediction and applying model explainability techniques to assess the importance of the landscape features to the performance predictions. Next, deterministic clustering of the meta-representations demonstrates that using them captures algorithm performance across the space and detects regions of poor and good algorithm performance, together with an explanation of which landscape properties are leading to it.
A key component of automated algorithm selection and configuration, which in most cases are performed using supervised machine learning (ML) methods is a good-performing predictive model. The predictive model uses the feature representation of a set of problem instances as input data and predicts the algorithm performance achieved on them. Common machine learning models struggle to make predictions for instances with feature representations not covered by the training data, resulting in poor generalization to unseen problems. In this study, we propose a workflow to estimate the generalizability of a predictive model for algorithm performance, trained on one benchmark suite to another. The workflow has been tested by training predictive models across benchmark suites and the results show that generalizability patterns in the landscape feature space are reflected in the performance space.
Leave-one-problem-out (LOPO) performance prediction requires machine learning (ML) models to extrapolate algorithms' performance from a set of training problems to a previously unseen problem. LOPO is a very challenging task even for state-of-the-art approaches. Models that work well in the easier leave-one-instance-out scenario often fail to generalize well to the LOPO setting. To address the LOPO problem, recent work suggested enriching standard random forest (RF) performance regression models with a weighted average of algorithms' performance on training problems that are considered similar to a test problem. More precisely, in this RF+clust approach, the weights are chosen proportionally to the distances of the problems in some feature space. Here in this work, we extend the RF+clust approach by adjusting the distance-based weights with the importance of the features for performance regression. That is, instead of considering cosine distance in the feature space, we consider a weighted distance measure, with weights depending on the relevance of the feature for the regression model. Our empirical evaluation of the modified RF+clust approach on the CEC 2014 benchmark suite confirms its advantages over the naive distance measure. However, we also observe room for improvement, in particular with respect to more expressive feature portfolios.
Per-instance automated algorithm configuration and selection are gaining significant moments in evolutionary computation in recent years. Two crucial, sometimes implicit, ingredients for these automated machine learning (AutoML) methods are 1) feature-based representations of the problem instances and 2) performance prediction methods that take the features as input to estimate how well a specific algorithm instance will perform on a given problem instance. Non-surprisingly, common machine learning models fail to make predictions for instances whose feature-based representation is underrepresented or not covered in the training data, resulting in poor generalization ability of the models for problems not seen during training.In this work, we study leave-one-problem-out (LOPO) performance prediction. We analyze whether standard random forest (RF) model predictions can be improved by calibrating them with a weighted average of performance values obtained by the algorithm on problem instances that are sufficiently close to the problem for which a performance prediction is sought, measured by cosine similarity in feature space. While our RF+clust approach obtains more accurate performance prediction for several problems, its predictive power crucially depends on the chosen similarity threshold as well as on the feature portfolio for which the cosine similarity is measured, thereby opening a new angle for feature selection in a zero-shot learning setting, as LOPO is termed in machine learning.
Algorithm selection wizards are effective and versatile tools that automatically select an optimization algorithm given high-level information about the problem and available computational resources, such as number and type of decision variables, maximal number of evaluations, possibility to parallelize evaluations, etc. State-of-the-art algorithm selection wizards are complex and difficult to improve. We propose in this work the use of automated configuration methods for improving their performance by finding better configurations of the algorithms that compose them. In particular, we use elitist iterated racing (irace) to find CMA configurations for specific artificial benchmarks that replace the hand-crafted CMA configurations currently used in the NGOpt wizard provided by the Nevergrad platform. We discuss in detail the setup of irace for the purpose of generating configurations that work well over the diverse set of problem instances within each benchmark. Our approach improves the performance of the NGOpt wizard, even on benchmark suites that were not part of the tuning by irace.