One of the most common approaches for multiobjective optimization is to generate a solution set that well approximates the whole Pareto-optimal frontier to facilitate the later decision-making process. However, how to evaluate and compare the quality of different solution sets remains challenging. Existing measures typically require additional problem knowledge and information, such as a reference point or a substituted set of the Pareto-optimal frontier. In this paper, we propose a quality measure, called dominance move (DoM), to compare solution sets generated by multiobjective optimizers. Given two solution sets, DoM measures the minimum sum of move distances for one set to weakly Pareto dominate the other set. DoM can be seen as a natural reflection of the difference between two solutions, capturing all aspects of solution sets' quality, being compliant with Pareto dominance, and does not need any additional problem knowledge and parameters. We present an exact method to calculate the DoM in the biobjective case. We show the necessary condition of constructing the optimal partition for a solution set's minimum move, and accordingly propose an efficient algorithm to recursively calculate the DoM. Finally, DoM is evaluated on several groups of artificial and real test cases as well as by a comparison with two well-established quality measures.
As pointed out by @cite_21 , the @math indicator has some desirable features, such as no need of a reference set, complying with the Pareto dominance relation, and representing natural extension to the evaluation of approximation schemes in operations research and theory. However, one weakness of the @math indicator is that its evaluation result is only related to one particular solution in either solution set. This could lead to an inaccurate evaluation of quality comparison between solution sets. Figure gives an example that the @math indicator fails to distinguish between solution sets ( @math and @math ). As can be seen from the figure, @math has more solutions and a better coverage over the Pareto-optimal frontier than @math , but the two sets have the same comparison result ( @math ).
@cite_21
1924023668 2949121808 2029496228 2947175317
A function @math is @math -resilient if all its Fourier coefficients of degree at most @math are zero, i.e., @math is uncorrelated with all low-degree parities. We study the notion of @math @math of Boolean functions, where we say that @math is @math -approximately @math -resilient if @math is @math -close to a @math -valued @math -resilient function in @math distance. We show that approximate resilience essentially characterizes the complexity of agnostic learning of a concept class @math over the uniform distribution. Roughly speaking, if all functions in a class @math are far from being @math -resilient then @math can be learned agnostically in time @math and conversely, if @math contains a function close to being @math -resilient then agnostic learning of @math in the statistical query (SQ) framework of Kearns has complexity of at least @math . This characterization is based on the duality between @math approximation by degree- @math polynomials and approximate @math -resilience that we establish. In particular, it implies that @math approximation by low-degree polynomials, known to be sufficient for agnostic learning over product distributions, is in fact necessary. Focusing on monotone Boolean functions, we exhibit the existence of near-optimal @math -approximately @math -resilient monotone functions for all @math . Prior to our work, it was conceivable even that every monotone function is @math -far from any @math -resilient function. Furthermore, we construct simple, explicit monotone functions based on @math and @math that are close to highly resilient functions. Our constructions are based on a fairly general resilience analysis and amplification. These structural results, together with the characterization, imply nearly optimal lower bounds for agnostic learning of monotone juntas. Let @math be a @math -ary predicate over a finite alphabet. Consider a random CSP @math instance @math over @math variables with @math constraints. When @math the instance @math will be unsatisfiable with high probability, and we want to find a refutation - i.e., a certificate of unsatisfiability. When @math is the @math -ary OR predicate, this is the well studied problem of refuting random @math -SAT formulas, and an efficient algorithm is known only when @math . Understanding the density required for refutation of other predicates is important in cryptography, proof complexity, and learning theory. Previously, it was known that for a @math -ary predicate, having @math constraints suffices for refutation. We give a criterion for predicates that often yields efficient refutation algorithms at much lower densities. Specifically, if @math fails to support a @math -wise uniform distribution, then there is an efficient algorithm that refutes random CSP @math instances @math whp when @math . Indeed, our algorithm will "somewhat strongly" refute @math , certifying @math , if @math then we get the strongest possible refutation, certifying @math . This last result is new even in the context of random @math -SAT. Regarding the optimality of our @math requirement, prior work on SDP hierarchies has given some evidence that efficient refutation of random CSP @math may be impossible when @math . Thus there is an indication our algorithm's dependence on @math is optimal for every @math , at least in the context of SDP hierarchies. Along these lines, we show that our refutation algorithm can be carried out by the @math -round SOS SDP hierarchy. Finally, as an application of our result, we falsify assumptions used to show hardness-of-learning results in recent work of Daniely, Linial, and Shalev-Shwartz. The hypervolume indicator is an increasingly popular set measure to compare the quality of two Pareto sets. The basic ingredient of most hypervolume indicator based optimization algorithms is the calculation of the hypervolume contribution of single solutions regarding a Pareto set. We show that exact calculation of the hypervolume contribution is #P-hard while its approximation is NP-hard. The same holds for the calculation of the minimal contribution. We also prove that it is NP-hard to decide whether a solution has the least hypervolume contribution. Even deciding whether the contribution of a solution is at most (1+@e) times the minimal contribution is NP-hard. This implies that it is neither possible to efficiently find the least contributing solution (unless P=NP) nor to approximate it (unless NP=BPP). Nevertheless, in the second part of the paper we present a fast approximation algorithm for this problem. We prove that for arbitrarily given @e,@d>0 it calculates a solution with contribution at most (1+@e) times the minimal contribution with probability at least (1-@d). Though it cannot run in polynomial time for all instances, it performs extremely fast on various benchmark datasets. The algorithm solves very large problem instances which are intractable for exact algorithms (e.g., 10,000 solutions in 100 dimensions) within a few seconds. Reducing hidden bias in the data and ensuring fairness in algorithmic data analysis has recently received significant attention. We complement several recent papers in this line of research by introducing a general method to reduce bias in the data through random projections in a fair'' subspace. We apply this method to densest subgraph and @math -means. For densest subgraph, our approach based on fair projections allows to recover both theoretically and empirically an almost optimal, fair, dense subgraph hidden in the input data. We also show that, under the small set expansion hypothesis, approximating this problem beyond a factor of @math is NP-hard and we show a polynomial time algorithm with a matching approximation bound. We further apply our method to @math -means. In a previous paper, [NIPS 2017] showed that problems such as @math -means can be approximated up to a constant factor while ensuring that none of two protected class (e.g., gender, ethnicity) is disparately impacted. We show that fair projections generalize the concept of fairlet introduced by to any number of protected attributes and improve empirically the quality of the resulting clustering. We also present the first constant-factor approximation for an arbitrary number of protected attributes thus settling an open problem recently addressed in several works.