Towards Automated Design of Bayesian Optimization via Exploratory Landscape Analysis

Bayesian optimization (BO) algorithms form a class of surrogate-based heuristics, aimed at efficiently computing high-quality solutions for numerical black-box optimization problems. The BO pipeline is highly modular, with different design choices for the initial sampling strategy, the surrogate model, the acquisition function (AF), the solver used to optimize the AF, etc. We demonstrate in this work that a dynamic selection of the AF can benefit the BO design. More precisely, we show that already a na\"ive random forest regression model, built on top of exploratory landscape analysis features that are computed from the initial design points, suffices to recommend AFs that outperform any static choice, when considering performance over the classic BBOB benchmark suite for derivative-free numerical optimization methods on the COCO platform. Our work hence paves a way towards AutoML-assisted, on-the-fly BO designs that adjust their behavior on a run-by-run basis.

PI is back! Switching Acquisition Functions in Bayesian Optimization

Bayesian Optimization (BO) is a powerful, sample-efficient technique to optimize expensive-to-evaluate functions. Each of the BO components, such as the surrogate model, the acquisition function (AF), or the initial design, is subject to a wide range of design choices. Selecting the right components for a given optimization task is a challenging task, which can have significant impact on the quality of the obtained results. In this work, we initiate the analysis of which AF to favor for which optimization scenarios. To this end, we benchmark SMAC3 using Expected Improvement (EI) and Probability of Improvement (PI) as acquisition functions on the 24 BBOB functions of the COCO environment. We compare their results with those of schedules switching between AFs. One schedule aims to use EI's explorative behavior in the early optimization steps, and then switches to PI for a better exploitation in the final steps. We also compare this to a random schedule and round-robin selection of EI and PI. We observe that dynamic schedules oftentimes outperform any single static one. Our results suggest that a schedule that allocates the first 25 % of the optimization budget to EI and the last 75 % to PI is a reliable default. However, we also observe considerable performance differences for the 24 functions, suggesting that a per-instance allocation, possibly learned on the fly, could offer significant improvement over the state-of-the-art BO designs.

Identifying Properties of Real-World Optimisation Problems through a Questionnaire

Optimisation algorithms are commonly compared on benchmarks to get insight into performance differences. However, it is not clear how closely benchmarks match the properties of real-world problems because these properties are largely unknown. This work investigates the properties of real-world problems through a questionnaire to enable the design of future benchmark problems that more closely resemble those found in the real world. The results, while not representative, show that many problems possess at least one of the following properties: they are constrained, deterministic, have only continuous variables, require substantial computation times for both the objectives and the constraints, or allow a limited number of evaluations. Properties like known optimal solutions and analytical gradients are rarely available, limiting the options in guiding the optimisation process. These are all important aspects to consider when designing realistic benchmark problems. At the same time, objective functions are often reported to be black-box and since many problem properties are unknown the design of realistic benchmarks is difficult. To further improve the understanding of real-world problems, readers working on a real-world optimisation problem are encouraged to fill out the questionnaire: https://tinyurl.com/opt-survey

Towards Realistic Optimization Benchmarks: A Questionnaire on the Properties of Real-World Problems

Benchmarks are a useful tool for empirical performance comparisons. However, one of the main shortcomings of existing benchmarks is that it remains largely unclear how they relate to real-world problems. What does an algorithm's performance on a benchmark say about its potential on a specific real-world problem? This work aims to identify properties of real-world problems through a questionnaire on real-world single-, multi-, and many-objective optimization problems. Based on initial responses, a few challenges that have to be considered in the design of realistic benchmarks can already be identified. A key point for future work is to gather more responses to the questionnaire to allow an analysis of common combinations of properties. In turn, such common combinations can then be included in improved benchmark suites. To gather more data, the reader is invited to participate in the questionnaire at: https://tinyurl.com/opt-survey