Paper detail

Improved Sample Complexity Bounds for Branch-and-Cut

Branch-and-cut is the most widely used algorithm for solving integer programs, employed by commercial solvers like CPLEX and Gurobi. Branch-and-cut has a wide variety of tunable parameters that have a huge impact on the size of the search tree that it builds, but are challenging to tune by hand. An increasingly popular approach is to use machine learning to tune these parameters: using a training set of integer programs from the application domain at hand, the goal is to find a configuration with strong predicted performance on future, unseen integer programs from the same domain. If the training set is too small, a configuration may have good performance over the training set but poor performance on future integer programs. In this paper, we prove sample complexity guarantees for this procedure, which bound how large the training set should be to ensure that for any configuration, its average performance over the training set is close to its expected future performance. Our guarantees apply to parameters that control the most important aspects of branch-and-cut: node selection, branching constraint selection, and cutting plane selection, and are sharper and more general than those found in prior research.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.