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

Maxim Buzdalov

Maxim Buzdalov contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Neural and Evolutionary Computing

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
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

4 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Blending Dynamic Programming with Monte Carlo Simulation for Bounding the Running Time of Evolutionary Algorithms

With the goal to provide absolute lower bounds for the best possible running times that can be achieved by $(1+λ)$-type search heuristics on common benchmark problems, we recently suggested a dynamic programming approach that computes optimal expected running times and the regret values inferred when deviating from the optimal parameter choice. Our previous work is restricted to problems for which transition probabilities between different states can be expressed by relatively simple mathematical expressions. With the goal to cover broader sets of problems, we suggest in this work an extension of the dynamic programming approach to settings in which the transition probabilities cannot necessarily be computed exactly, but in which they can be approximated numerically, up to arbitrary precision, by Monte Carlo sampling. We apply our hybrid Monte Carlo dynamic programming approach to a concatenated jump function and demonstrate how the obtained bounds can be used to gain a deeper understanding into parameter control schemes.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Fixed-Target Runtime Analysis

Runtime analysis aims at contributing to our understanding of evolutionary algorithms through mathematical analyses of their runtimes. In the context of discrete optimization problems, runtime analysis classically studies the time needed to find an optimal solution. However, both from a practical and from a theoretical viewpoint, more fine-grained performance measures are needed to gain a more detailed understanding of the main working principles and their resulting performance implications. Two complementary approaches have been suggested: fixed-budget analyses and fixed-target analyses. In this work, we conduct an in-depth study on the advantages and the limitations of fixed-target analyses. We show that, different from fixed-budget analyses, many classical methods from the runtime analysis of discrete evolutionary algorithms yield fixed-target results without greater effort. We use this to conduct a number of new fixed-target analyses. However, we also point out examples where an extension of existing runtime results to fixed-target results is highly non-trivial.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Optimal Mutation Rates for the $(1+λ)$ EA on OneMax

The OneMax problem, alternatively known as the Hamming distance problem, is often referred to as the "drosophila of evolutionary computation (EC)", because of its high relevance in theoretical and empirical analyses of EC approaches. It is therefore surprising that even for the simplest of all mutation-based algorithms, Randomized Local Search and the (1+1) EA, the optimal mutation rates were determined only very recently, in a GECCO 2019 poster. In this work, we extend the analysis of optimal mutation rates to two variants of the $(1+λ)$ EA and to the $(1+λ)$ RLS. To do this, we use dynamic programming and, for the $(1+λ)$ EA, numeric optimization, both requiring $Θ(n^3)$ time for problem dimension $n$. With this in hand, we compute for all population sizes $λ\in \{2^i \mid 0 \le i \le 18\}$ and for problem dimension $n \in \{1000, 2000, 5000\}$ which mutation rates minimize the expected running time and which ones maximize the expected progress. Our results do not only provide a lower bound against which we can measure common evolutionary approaches, but we also obtain insight into the structure of these optimal parameter choices. For example, we show that, for large population sizes, the best number of bits to flip is not monotone in the distance to the optimum. We also observe that the expected remaining running time are not necessarily unimodal for the $(1+λ)$ EA$_{0 \rightarrow 1}$ with shifted mutation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The $(1+(λ,λ))$ Genetic Algorithm for Permutations

The $(1+(λ,λ))$ genetic algorithm is a bright example of an evolutionary algorithm which was developed based on the insights from theoretical findings. This algorithm uses crossover, and it was shown to asymptotically outperform all mutation-based evolutionary algorithms even on simple problems like OneMax. Subsequently it was studied on a number of other problems, but all of these were pseudo-Boolean. We aim at improving this situation by proposing an adaptation of the $(1+(λ,λ))$ genetic algorithm to permutation-based problems. Such an adaptation is required, because permutations are noticeably different from bit strings in some key aspects, such as the number of possible mutations and their mutual dependence. We also present the first runtime analysis of this algorithm on a permutation-based problem called Ham whose properties resemble those of OneMax. On this problem, where the simple mutation-based algorithms have the running time of $Θ(n^2 \log n)$ for problem size $n$, the $(1+(λ,λ))$ genetic algorithm finds the optimum in $O(n^2)$ fitness queries. We augment this analysis with experiments, which show that this algorithm is also fast in practice.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access