GENOPT 2016: Design of a generalization-based challenge in global optimization

While comparing results on benchmark functions is a widely used practice to demonstrate the competitiveness of global optimization algorithms, fixed benchmarks can lead to a negative data mining process. To avoid this negative effect, the GENOPT contest benchmarks can be used which are based on randomized function generators, designed for scientific experiments, with fixed statistical characteristics but individual variation of the generated instances. The generators are available to participants for off-line tests and online tuning schemes, but the final competition is based on random seeds communicated in the last phase through a cooperative process. A brief presentation and discussion of the methods and results obtained in the framework of the GENOPT contest are given in this contribution.

[1]  János D. Pintér,et al.  Benchmarking nonlinear optimization software in technical computing environments , 2013 .

[2]  Jorge J. Moré,et al.  Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.1007/s101070100263 , 2001 .

[3]  Yaroslav D. Sergeyev,et al.  Algorithm 829: Software for generation of classes of test functions with known local and global minima for global optimization , 2003, TOMS.

[4]  Ilya Lebedev,et al.  Solving GENOPT Problems with the Use of ExaMin Solver , 2016, LION.

[5]  Tamás Vinkó,et al.  A comparison of complete global optimization solvers , 2005, Math. Program..

[6]  David H. Wolpert,et al.  No free lunch theorems for optimization , 1997, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[7]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[8]  D. Kvasov,et al.  Lipschitz optimization methods for fitting a sum of damped sinusoids to a series of observations , 2017 .

[9]  Y. Sergeyev,et al.  Operational zones for comparing metaheuristic and deterministic one-dimensional global optimization algorithms , 2017, Math. Comput. Simul..

[10]  P. Pardalos,et al.  Handbook of global optimization , 1995 .

[11]  Roberto Battiti,et al.  The continuous reactive tabu search: Blending combinatorial optimization and stochastic search for global optimization , 1996, Ann. Oper. Res..

[12]  Catherine C. McGeoch.  Feature Article - Toward an Experimental Method for Algorithm Simulation , 1996, INFORMS J. Comput..

[13]  Gintautas Dzemyda,et al.  Stochastic and global optimization , 2002 .

[14]  Yaroslav D. Sergeyev,et al.  Deterministic approaches for solving practical black-box global optimization problems , 2015, Adv. Eng. Softw..

[15]  Klaus Schittkowski,et al.  More test examples for nonlinear programming codes , 1981 .

[16]  Mauricio G. C. Resende,et al.  Designing and reporting on computational experiments with heuristic methods , 1995, J. Heuristics.

[17]  Y. D. Sergeyev,et al.  Global Optimization with Non-Convex Constraints - Sequential and Parallel Algorithms (Nonconvex Optimization and its Applications Volume 45) (Nonconvex Optimization and Its Applications) , 2000 .

[18]  J D Pinter,et al.  Global Optimization in Action—Continuous and Lipschitz Optimization: Algorithms, Implementations and Applications , 2010 .

[19]  Yaroslav D. Sergeyev,et al.  Global Search Based on Efficient Diagonal Partitions and a Set of Lipschitz Constants , 2006, SIAM J. Optim..

[20]  Ben Paechter,et al.  Hybridisation of Evolutionary Algorithms Through Hyper-heuristics for Global Continuous Optimisation , 2016, LION.

[21]  John N. Hooker,et al.  Testing heuristics: We have it all wrong , 1995, J. Heuristics.

[22]  J. Carpenter.  May the best analyst win. , 2011, Science.

[23]  Nikolaos V. Sahinidis,et al.  Derivative-free optimization: a review of algorithms and comparison of software implementations , 2013, J. Glob. Optim..