Many optimization algorithm benchmarking platforms allow users to share their experimental data to promote reproducible and reusable research. However, different platforms use different data models and formats, which drastically complicates the identification of relevant datasets, their interpretation, and their interoperability. Therefore, a semantically rich, ontology-based, machine-readable data model that can be used by different platforms is highly desirable. In this paper, we report on the development of such an ontology, which we call OPTION (OPTImization algorithm benchmarking ONtology). Our ontology provides the vocabulary needed for semantic annotation of the core entities involved in the benchmarking process, such as algorithms, problems, and evaluation measures. It also provides means for automatic data integration, improved interoperability, and powerful querying capabilities, thereby increasing the value of the benchmarking data. We demonstrate the utility of OPTION, by annotating and querying a corpus of benchmark performance data from the BBOB collection of the COCO framework and from the Yet Another Black-Box Optimization Benchmark (YABBOB) family of the Nevergrad environment. In addition, we integrate features of the BBOB functional performance landscape into the OPTION knowledge base using publicly available datasets with exploratory landscape analysis. Finally, we integrate the OPTION knowledge base into the IOHprofiler environment and provide users with the ability to perform meta-analysis of performance data.
Multi-label classification (MLC) is an ML task of predictive modeling in which a data instance can simultaneously belong to multiple classes. MLC is increasingly gaining interest in different application domains such as text mining, computer vision, and bioinformatics. Several MLC algorithms have been proposed in the literature, resulting in a meta-optimization problem that the user needs to address: which MLC approach to select for a given dataset? To address this algorithm selection problem, we investigate in this work the quality of an automated approach that uses characteristics of the datasets - so-called features - and a trained algorithm selector to choose which algorithm to apply for a given task. For our empirical evaluation, we use a portfolio of 38 datasets. We consider eight MLC algorithms, whose quality we evaluate using six different performance metrics. We show that our automated algorithm selector outperforms any of the single MLC algorithms, and this is for all evaluated performance measures. Our selection approach is explainable, a characteristic that we exploit to investigate which meta-features have the largest influence on the decisions made by the algorithm selector. Finally, we also quantify the importance of the most significant meta-features for various domains.
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.
Fair algorithm evaluation is conditioned on the existence of high-quality benchmark datasets that are non-redundant and are representative of typical optimization scenarios. In this paper, we evaluate three heuristics for selecting diverse problem instances which should be involved in the comparison of optimization algorithms in order to ensure robust statistical algorithm performance analysis. The first approach employs clustering to identify similar groups of problem instances and subsequent sampling from each cluster to construct new benchmarks, while the other two approaches use graph algorithms for identifying dominating and maximal independent sets of nodes. We demonstrate the applicability of the proposed heuristics by performing a statistical performance analysis of five portfolios consisting of three optimization algorithms on five of the most commonly used optimization benchmarks. The results indicate that the statistical analyses of the algorithms' performance, conducted on each benchmark separately, produce conflicting outcomes, which can be used to give a false indication of the superiority of one algorithm over another. On the other hand, when the analysis is conducted on the problem instances selected with the proposed heuristics, which uniformly cover the problem landscape, the statistical outcomes are robust and consistent.
Per-instance algorithm selection seeks to recommend, for a given problem instance and a given performance criterion, one or several suitable algorithms that are expected to perform well for the particular setting. The selection is classically done offline, using openly available information about the problem instance or features that are extracted from the instance during a dedicated feature extraction step. This ignores valuable information that the algorithms accumulate during the optimization process. In this work, we propose an alternative, online algorithm selection scheme which we coin per-run algorithm selection. In our approach, we start the optimization with a default algorithm, and, after a certain number of iterations, extract instance features from the observed trajectory of this initial optimizer to determine whether to switch to another optimizer. We test this approach using the CMA-ES as the default solver, and a portfolio of six different optimizers as potential algorithms to switch to. In contrast to other recent work on online per-run algorithm selection, we warm-start the second optimizer using information accumulated during the first optimization phase. We show that our approach outperforms static per-instance algorithm selection. We also compare two different feature extraction principles, based on exploratory landscape analysis and time series analysis of the internal state variables of the CMA-ES, respectively. We show that a combination of both feature sets provides the most accurate recommendations for our test cases, taken from the BBOB function suite from the COCO platform and the YABBOB suite from the Nevergrad platform.
Selecting the most suitable algorithm and determining its hyperparameters for a given optimization problem is a challenging task. Accurately predicting how well a certain algorithm could solve the problem is hence desirable. Recent studies in single-objective numerical optimization show that supervised machine learning methods can predict algorithm performance using landscape features extracted from the problem instances. Existing approaches typically treat the algorithms as black-boxes, without consideration of their characteristics. To investigate in this work if a selection of landscape features that depends on algorithms properties could further improve regression accuracy, we regard the modular CMA-ES framework and estimate how much each landscape feature contributes to the best algorithm performance regression models. Exploratory data analysis performed on this data indicate that the set of most relevant features does not depend on the configuration of individual modules, but the influence that these features have on regression accuracy does. In addition, we have shown that by using classifiers that take the features relevance on the model accuracy, we are able to predict the status of individual modules in the CMA-ES configurations.
Landscape-aware algorithm selection approaches have so far mostly been relying on landscape feature extraction as a preprocessing step, independent of the execution of optimization algorithms in the portfolio. This introduces a significant overhead in computational cost for many practical applications, as features are extracted and computed via sampling and evaluating the problem instance at hand, similarly to what the optimization algorithm would perform anyway within its search trajectory. As suggested in Jankovic et al. (EvoAPPs 2021), trajectory-based algorithm selection circumvents the problem of costly feature extraction by computing landscape features from points that a solver sampled and evaluated during the optimization process. Features computed in this manner are used to train algorithm performance regression models, upon which a per-run algorithm selector is then built. In this work, we apply the trajectory-based approach onto a portfolio of five algorithms. We study the quality and accuracy of performance regression and algorithm selection models in the scenario of predicting different algorithm performances after a fixed budget of function evaluations. We rely on landscape features of the problem instance computed using one portion of the aforementioned budget of the same function evaluations. Moreover, we consider the possibility of switching between the solvers once, which requires them to be warm-started, i.e. when we switch, the second solver continues the optimization process already being initialized appropriately by making use of the information collected by the first solver. In this new context, we show promising performance of the trajectory-based per-run algorithm selection with warm-starting.
Predicting the performance of an optimization algorithm on a new problem instance is crucial in order to select the most appropriate algorithm for solving that problem instance. For this purpose, recent studies learn a supervised machine learning (ML) model using a set of problem landscape features linked to the performance achieved by the optimization algorithm. However, these models are black-box with the only goal of achieving good predictive performance, without providing explanations which landscape features contribute the most to the prediction of the performance achieved by the optimization algorithm. In this study, we investigate the expressiveness of problem landscape features utilized by different supervised ML models in automated algorithm performance prediction. The experimental results point out that the selection of the supervised ML method is crucial, since different supervised ML regression models utilize the problem landscape features differently and there is no common pattern with regard to which landscape features are the most informative.
Efficient solving of an unseen optimization problem is related to appropriate selection of an optimization algorithm and its hyper-parameters. For this purpose, automated algorithm performance prediction should be performed that in most commonly-applied practices involves training a supervised ML algorithm using a set of problem landscape features. However, the main issue of training such models is their limited explainability since they only provide information about the joint impact of the set of landscape features to the end prediction results. In this study, we are investigating explainable landscape-aware regression models where the contribution of each landscape feature to the prediction of the optimization algorithm performance is estimated on a global and local level. The global level provides information about the impact of the feature across all benchmark problems' instances, while the local level provides information about the impact on a specific problem instance. The experimental results are obtained using the COCO benchmark problems and three differently configured modular CMA-ESs. The results show a proof of concept that different set of features are important for different problem instances, which indicates that further personalization of the landscape space is required when training an automated algorithm performance prediction model.
In this paper, we present FoodChem, a new Relation Extraction (RE) model for identifying chemicals present in the composition of food entities, based on textual information provided in biomedical peer-reviewed scientific literature. The RE task is treated as a binary classification problem, aimed at identifying whether the contains relation exists between a food-chemical entity pair. This is accomplished by fine-tuning BERT, BioBERT and RoBERTa transformer models. For evaluation purposes, a novel dataset with annotated contains relations in food-chemical entity pairs is generated, in a golden and silver version. The models are integrated into a voting scheme in order to produce the silver version of the dataset which we use for augmenting the individual models, while the manually annotated golden version is used for their evaluation. Out of the three evaluated models, the BioBERT model achieves the best results, with a macro averaged F1 score of 0.902 in the unbalanced augmentation setting.