BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Martin Binder

Martin Binder contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

YAHPO Gym -- An Efficient Multi-Objective Multi-Fidelity Benchmark for Hyperparameter Optimization

When developing and analyzing new hyperparameter optimization methods, it is vital to empirically evaluate and compare them on well-curated benchmark suites. In this work, we propose a new set of challenging and relevant benchmark problems motivated by desirable properties and requirements for such benchmarks. Our new surrogate-based benchmark collection consists of 14 scenarios that in total constitute over 700 multi-fidelity hyperparameter optimization problems, which all enable multi-objective hyperparameter optimization. Furthermore, we empirically compare surrogate-based benchmarks to the more widely-used tabular benchmarks, and demonstrate that the latter may produce unfaithful results regarding the performance ranking of HPO methods. We examine and compare our benchmark collection with respect to defined requirements and propose a single-objective as well as a multi-objective benchmark suite on which we compare 7 single-objective and 7 multi-objective optimizers in a benchmark experiment. Our software is available at [https://github.com/slds-lmu/yahpo_gym].

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Multi-Objective Hyperparameter Tuning and Feature Selection using Filter Ensembles

Both feature selection and hyperparameter tuning are key tasks in machine learning. Hyperparameter tuning is often useful to increase model performance, while feature selection is undertaken to attain sparse models. Sparsity may yield better model interpretability and lower cost of data acquisition, data handling and model inference. While sparsity may have a beneficial or detrimental effect on predictive performance, a small drop in performance may be acceptable in return for a substantial gain in sparseness. We therefore treat feature selection as a multi-objective optimization task. We perform hyperparameter tuning and feature selection simultaneously because the choice of features of a model may influence what hyperparameters perform well. We present, benchmark, and compare two different approaches for multi-objective joint hyperparameter optimization and feature selection: The first uses multi-objective model-based optimization. The second is an evolutionary NSGA-II-based wrapper approach to feature selection which incorporates specialized sampling, mutation and recombination operators. Both methods make use of parameterized filter ensembles. While model-based optimization needs fewer objective evaluations to achieve good performance, it incurs computational overhead compared to the NSGA-II, so the preferred choice depends on the cost of evaluating a model on given data.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access