Paper detail

When is local search both effective and efficient?

Combinatorial optimization problems implicitly define fitness landscapes that combine the numeric structure of the 'fitness' function to be maximized with the combinatorial structure of which assignments are 'adjacent'. Local search starts at an assignment in this landscape and successively moves assignments until no further improvement is possible among the adjacent assignments. Classic analyses of local search algorithms have focused more on the question of effectiveness ("did we find a good solution?") and often implicitly assumed that there are no doubts about their efficiency ("did we find it quickly?"). But there are many reasons to doubt the efficiency of local search. Even if we focus on fitness landscapes on the hypercube that are single peaked on every subcube (i.e., semismooth fitness landscapes) where effectiveness is obvious, many local search algorithms are known to be inefficient. Since fitness landscapes are unwieldy exponentially large objects, we focus on their polynomial-sized representations by instances of valued constraint satisfaction problems (VCSP). We define a "direction" for valued constraints such that directed VCSPs generate semismooth fitness landscapes. We call VCSPs oriented if they do not have any pair of variables with arcs in both directions. Since recognizing if a VCSP-instance is directed or oriented is coNP-complete, we generalized oriented VCSPs as conditionally-smooth fitness landscapes that are recognizable in polynomial time for a VCSP-instance. We prove that many popular local search algorithms like random ascent, simulated annealing, history-based rules, jumping rules, and the Kernighan-Lin heuristic are very efficient on conditionally-smooth landscapes. But conditionally-smooth landscapes are still expressive enough so that algorithms like steepest ascent and random facet require a super-polynomial number of steps to find the fitness peak.

preprint2026arXivOpen 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.