The introduction of test set profiles, which assess the appropriateness of a test set and represent the flip side of evaluating the robustness of the solvers on that test set, are introduced.
Abstract
We propose a couple of novel tools for benchmarking optimization algorithms which possibly converge to different solutions on a test set: the quality profiles and the test set profiles. Their aim is to assess and compare algorithms in terms of quality (i.e. value of the objective function) of the obtained solutions, as well as to assess the consistency of the test set. A key distinguishing feature of the quality profiles we propose is its comparative deterministic procedure that emphasizes the accuracy of the solution, rather than the computational burden of solvers. In this regard, several test set--dependent approaches for both comparing and ranking algorithms have already been proposed in the literature, representing widely used benchmarking procedures. We believe that the joint use of such procedures, along with the novel quality profiles detailed here, should enhance the benchmarking process, in all those cases where the comparison encompasses exact methods as well as heuristics. Moreover, the literature on numerical optimization seems to have paid less attention, in the last decade, to determining how appropriate a test set used for benchmarking the selected solvers may be. This motivates the introduction of test set profiles, which assess the appropriateness of a test set and represent the flip side of evaluating the robustness of the solvers on that test set. This paper also includes extensive numerical experiments, showing the usefulness of quality profiles in both smooth and nonsmooth (derivative--free) optimization, along with the reference to a MATLAB code for plotting quality profiles and test set profiles.
This work presents a tool that implements data-driven approaches that can dynamically select a smaller number of instances that provide sufficient statistical evidence to evaluate the relative performance of a given set of solvers and makes them readily accessible to solver developers, thus enabling them to obtain swif...
Ashlin Iser, Marie Anastacio, Théo Matricon et al.· 0 citations
This work presents a performance-oriented benchmarking framework to facilitate meaningful comparisons of DMRG implementations, and applies it to quantify the performance of eight implementations, highlighting similarities and differences among them.
P. Sehlstedt, P. Bientinesi, Lars Karlsson· arXiv.org· 0 citations
Surrogate models constitute a promising approach for scaling multi-objective architecture optimization to larger spaces and complex architectural models and maintain the Pareto front quality provided by evolutionary algorithms.
J. A. Díaz-Pace, Daniele Di Pompeo, Antonela Tommasel· 0 citations
This work proposes a general method to reduce the number of scenario evaluations per solution and thus improve metaheuristiciency, using a sequential sampling procedure exploiting estimates of the solutions’ expected objective values.
Noah Schutte, K. Postek, Neil Yorke-Smith· 0 citations
Metaheuristic optimization has become a widely adopted approach for controller parameter tuning in nonlinear, multi-objective engineering systems where classical methods fail. However, the rapid expansion of the literature has not been matched by methodological rigor, raising concerns about reproducibility and practica...
R. A. Saleh, Abdullah Haidar, Noor S. S. Al-Mathhagi et al.· 2026 6th International Confe...· 0 citations
This paper introduces the bi-objective problem class CLIMB and analyzes the runtime of GSEMO and the widely used NSGA-II on this problem, and proves that GSEMO and NSGA-II-DYN, a version of NSGA-II with dynamic population sizes, can find the Pareto front of CLIMB in expected fitness evaluations.
Andre Opris· arXiv.org· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.