Algorithms for Approximate Minimization of the Difference Between Submodular Functions, with Applications

We extend the work of Narasimhan and Bilmes [30] for minimizing set functions representable as a difference between submodular functions. Similar to [30], our new algorithms are guaranteed to monotonically reduce the objective function at every step. We empirically and theoretically show that the per-iteration cost of our algorithms is much less than [30], and our algorithms can be used to efficiently minimize a difference between submodular functions under various combinatorial constraints, a problem not previously addressed. We provide computational bounds and a hardness result on the mul- tiplicative inapproximability of minimizing the difference between submodular functions. We show, however, that it is possible to give worst-case additive bounds by providing a polynomial time computable lower-bound on the minima. Finally we show how a number of machine learning problems can be modeled as minimizing the difference between submodular functions. We experimentally show the validity of our algorithms by testing them on the problem of feature selection with submodular cost features.Comment: 17 pages, 8 figures. A shorter version of this appeared in Proc. Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI), Catalina Islands, 201

OneMax in Black-Box Models with Several Restrictions

Black-box complexity studies lower bounds for the efficiency of general-purpose black-box optimization algorithms such as evolutionary algorithms and other search heuristics. Different models exist, each one being designed to analyze a different aspect of typical heuristics such as the memory size or the variation operators in use. While most of the previous works focus on one particular such aspect, we consider in this work how the combination of several algorithmic restrictions influence the black-box complexity. Our testbed are so-called OneMax functions, a classical set of test functions that is intimately related to classic coin-weighing problems and to the board game Mastermind. We analyze in particular the combined memory-restricted ranking-based black-box complexity of OneMax for different memory sizes. While its isolated memory-restricted as well as its ranking-based black-box complexity for bit strings of length $n$ is only of order $n/\log n$, the combined model does not allow for algorithms being faster than linear in $n$, as can be seen by standard information-theoretic considerations. We show that this linear bound is indeed asymptotically tight. Similar results are obtained for other memory- and offspring-sizes. Our results also apply to the (Monte Carlo) complexity of OneMax in the recently introduced elitist model, in which only the best-so-far solution can be kept in the memory. Finally, we also provide improved lower bounds for the complexity of OneMax in the regarded models. Our result enlivens the quest for natural evolutionary algorithms optimizing OneMax in $o(n \log n)$ iterations.Comment: This is the full version of a paper accepted to GECCO 201

Towards a Theory-Guided Benchmarking Suite for Discrete Black-Box Optimization Heuristics: Profiling (1+λ)(1+\lambda) EA Variants on OneMax and LeadingOnes

Theoretical and empirical research on evolutionary computation methods complement each other by providing two fundamentally different approaches towards a better understanding of black-box optimization heuristics. In discrete optimization, both streams developed rather independently of each other, but we observe today an increasing interest in reconciling these two sub-branches. In continuous optimization, the COCO (COmparing Continuous Optimisers) benchmarking suite has established itself as an important platform that theoreticians and practitioners use to exchange research ideas and questions. No widely accepted equivalent exists in the research domain of discrete black-box optimization. Marking an important step towards filling this gap, we adjust the COCO software to pseudo-Boolean optimization problems, and obtain from this a benchmarking environment that allows a fine-grained empirical analysis of discrete black-box heuristics. In this documentation we demonstrate how this test bed can be used to profile the performance of evolutionary algorithms. More concretely, we study the optimization behavior of several $(1+\lambda)$ EA variants on the two benchmark problems OneMax and LeadingOnes. This comparison motivates a refined analysis for the optimization time of the $(1+\lambda)$ EA on LeadingOnes