Abstract
As an individual algorithm rarely outperforms all kinds of optimization problems, algorithm portfolios are proposed to combine algorithms and take advantage of their strengths which fits well the prevalent theme of memetic computing. When there are many algorithms to choose from, the possibilities of algorithm combinations are numerous. Therefore, composing an algorithm portfolio which performs well for a given problem class is essential. In this paper, based on a problem set drawn from any unknown problem class according to an unknown probability distribution, we propose a general method to automatically accomplish portfolio construction. The problem set is used as training data for our method to learn an algorithm portfolio suitable for solving the underlying problem class. To construct the portfolio, algorithms are chosen and added one by one. We first find the best-performing algorithm based on its average rank of solving the training problem set. Its most complementary algorithm is then selected by applying the Pearson correlation coefficient of fitness values at the first hitting time. The method iterates to compose the portfolio with more and more algorithms until there is no more improvement. The experimental results indicate the effectiveness of this approach to select well-cooperated algorithms, and the composed portfolio is shown to have the best rank compared to individual algorithms, elite portfolios and comparison algorithms.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Karaboga D, Akay B (2009) A comparative study of artificial bee colony algorithm. Appl Math Comput 214(1):108–132
Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of ICNN’95-international conference on neural networks. vol 4, IEEE, pp 1942–1948
Das S, Suganthan PN (2010) Differential evolution: a survey of the state-of-the-art. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 15(1):4–31
Hansen N (2006) The CMA evolution strategy: a comparing review. In: Towards a new evolutionary computation. Springer, pp 75–102
Fletcher R (2013) Practical methods of optimization. Wiley
Wolpert DH, Macready WG (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 1(1):67–82
Garcia-Martinez C, Rodriguez FJ, Manuel L (2012) Arbitrary function optimisation with metaheuristics. Soft Comput 16(12):2115–2133
Kadlec P, Gabrys B (2009) Architecture for development of adaptive on-line prediction models. Memet Comput 1(4):241–269
Burke EK, Gendreau M, Hyde M, Kendall G, Ochoa G, Özcan E, Qu R (2013) Hyper-heuristics: a survey of the state of the art. J Oper Res Soc 64(12):1695–1724
Ertenlice O, Kalayci CB (2018) A survey of swarm intelligence for portfolio optimization: algorithms and applications. Swarm Evolut Comput 39:36–52
Yuen SY, Chow CK, Zhang X, Lou Y (2016) Which algorithm should I choose: an evolutionary algorithm portfolio approach. Appl Soft Comput 40:654–673
He Y, Yuen SY, Lou Y, Zhang X (2019) A sequential algorithm portfolio approach for black box optimization. Swarm Evolut Comput 44:559–570
Vrugt JA, Robinson BA, Hyman JM (2008) Self-adaptive multimethod search for global optimization in real-parameter spaces. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 13(2):243–259
Peng F, Tang K, Chen G, Yao X (2010) Population-based algorithm portfolios for numerical optimization. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 14(5):782–800
Akay R, Basturk A, Kalinli A, Yao X (2017) Parallel population-based algorithm portfolios: an empirical study. Neurocomputing 247:115–125
He M, Hu Y, Chen H, Sun L, Wang X, Su W, Liu F, Liang X, Ma L (2019) Lifecycle coevolution framework for many evolutionary and swarm intelligence algorithms fusion in solving complex optimization problems. Swarm Evolut Comput 47:3–20
Muñoz MA, Sun Y, Kirley M, Halgamuge SK (2015) Algorithm selection for black-box continuous optimization problems: a survey on methods and challenges. Inf Sci 317:224–245
Kerschke P, Hoos HH, Neumann F, Trautmann H (2019) Automated algorithm selection: survey and perspectives. Evolut Comput 27(1):3–45
Wu G, Mallipeddi R, Suganthan PN (2019) Ensemble strategies for population-based optimization algorithms—a survey. Swarm Evolut Comput 44:695–711
Tang K, Peng F, Chen G, Yao X (2014) Population-based algorithm portfolios with automated constituent algorithms selection. Inf Sci 279:94–104
Yuen SY, Zhang X (2015) On composing an algorithm portfolio. Memet Comput 7(3):203–214
Yuen SY, Lou Y, Zhang X (2019) Selecting evolutionary algorithms for black box design optimization problems. Soft Comput 23(15):6511–6531
He J, Yao X (2003) Towards an analytic framework for analysing the computation time of evolutionary algorithms. Artif Intell 145(1–2):59–97
Liu W, Yuen SY, Sung CW (2020) Composing algorithm portfolio with problem set of unknown distribution. In: 2020 IEEE symposium series on computational intelligence (SSCI), pp 814–821
Liang JJ, Qu BY, Suganthan PN, Hernández-Díaz AG (2013) Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2013 special session on real-parameter optimization. Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China and Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Technical Report, 201212(34):281–295
Fan Q, Yan X, Zhang Y (2018) Auto-selection mechanism of differential evolution algorithm variants and its application. Eur J Oper Res 270(2):636–653
Hong L, Page SE (2004) Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proc Natl Acad Sci 101(46):16385–16389
Hart E, Sim K (2018) On constructing ensembles for combinatorial optimisation. Evolut Comput 26(1):67–87
Munoz MA, Kirley M (2016) Icarus: identification of complementary algorithms by uncovered sets. In: 2016 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC). IEEE, pp 2427–2432
Liu S, Tang K, Yao X (2020) Generative adversarial construction of parallel portfolios. IEEE Trans Cybern 52:784–795
Nof Y, Strichman O (2021) Real-time solving of computationally hard problems using optimal algorithm portfolios. Ann Math Artif Intell 89(7):693–710
Tang K, Liu S, Yang P, Yao X (2021) Few-shots parallel algorithm portfolio construction via co-evolution. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 25(3):595–607
Luo XJ, Fong KF (2019) Development of integrated demand and supply side management strategy of multi-energy system for residential building application. Appl Energy 242:570–587
Souravlias D, Kotsireas IS, Pardalos PM, Parsopoulos KE (2019) Parallel algorithm portfolios with performance forecasting. Optim Methods Softw 34(6):1231–1250
Nikolaus H, Anne A, Raymond R, Olaf M, Tea T, Dimo B (2020) Coco: a platform for comparing continuous optimizers in a black-box setting. Optim Methods Softw 36:114–144
Gallagher M, Yuan B (2006) A general-purpose tunable landscape generator. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 10(5):590–603
Rönkkönen J, Li X, Kyrki V, Lampinen J (2011) A framework for generating tunable test functions for multimodal optimization. Soft Comput 15(9):1689–1706
Yang L, Shiu YY (2019) On constructing alternative benchmark suite for evolutionary algorithms. Swarm Evolut Comput 44:287–292
Benesty J, Chen J, Huang Y, Cohen I (2009) Pearson correlation coefficient. In: Noise reduction in speech processing. Springer, pp 1–4
García S, Molina D, Lozano M, Herrera F (2009) A study on the use of non-parametric tests for analyzing the evolutionary algorithms’ behaviour: a case study on the CEC’2005 special session on real parameter optimization. J Heuristics 15(6):617
García-Martínez C, Lozano M, Herrera F, Molina D, Sánchez AM (2008) Global and local real-coded genetic algorithms based on parent-centric crossover operators. Eur J Oper Res 185(3):1088–1113
Brest J, Greiner S, Boskovic B, Mernik M, Zumer V (2006) Self-adapting control parameters in differential evolution: a comparative study on numerical benchmark problems. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 10(6):646–657
Kai QA, Huang VL, Suganthan PN (2008) Differential evolution algorithm with strategy adaptation for global numerical optimization. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 13(2):398–417
Zhang J, Sanderson AC (2009) JADE: adaptive differential evolution with optional external archive. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 13(5):945–958
Wang Y, Cai Z, Zhang Q (2011) Differential evolution with composite trial vector generation strategies and control parameters. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 15(1):55–66
Tanabe R, Fukunaga AS (2014) Improving the search performance of shade using linear population size reduction. In: 2014 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC). IEEE, pp 1658–1665
Dekking FM, Kraaikamp C, Lopuhaä HP, Meester LE (2005) A modern introduction to probability and statistics: understanding why and how. Springer Science & Business Media
Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. Pearson Education India
Hansen N, Finck S, Ros R, Auger A (2009) Real-parameter black-box optimization benchmarking 2009: noiseless functions definitions
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
There are three experiments conducted to verify the abilities of the approach proposed in this paper. The problem sets for both composing and testing the portfolios are all randomly sampled by the given distributions. The detailed information of problem sets is recorded in Appendix.
Tables 10, 11, 12 and 13 cover problem sets in experiment 4.1. In the first experiment, the problems in each problem set is uniformly sampled from BBOB.
Tables 15 and 16 cover problem sets in experiment 4.2. In the second experiment, the problem sets are non-uniformly sampled. The occurrence distribution of problems is that 90% of the problems are sampled from unimodal and linear problems, which are functions 1, 2, 5, 6, 10, 12 of BBOB [49], while the rest of the problems (10%) are randomly selected from other problems.
From Tables 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 “fxx” represents the function numbers of BBOB and the number following is the instance number. For example, “f15-80” is BBOB suite problem f15 instance 80 in 20D.
Tables 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 record values of nGaussian, which is the number of Gaussians used in the landscape in experiment 4.3. In the third experiment, the problems in the problem sets are randomly generated from the MSG landscape generator.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, W., Yuen, S.Y. & Sung, C.W. A generic method to compose an algorithm portfolio with a problem set of unknown distribution. Memetic Comp. 14, 287–304 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12293-022-00367-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12293-022-00367-8