Pseudo-Boolean monotone functions are unimodal functions which are trivial to optimize for some hillclimbers, but are challenging for a surprising number of evolutionary algorithms (EAs). A general trend is that EAs are efficient if parameters like the mutation rate are set conservatively, but may need exponential time otherwise. In particular, it was known that the @math -EA and the @math -EA can optimize every monotone function in pseudolinear time if the mutation rate is @math for some @math . The second part of the statement was also known for the @math -EA. In this paper we show that the first statement does not apply to the @math -EA. More precisely, we prove that for every constant @math there is a constant integer @math such that the @math -EA with mutation rate @math and population size @math needs superpolynomial time to optimize some monotone functions. Thus, increasing the population size by just a constant has devastating effects on the performance. This is in stark contrast to many other benchmark functions on which increasing the population size either increases the performance significantly, or affects performance mildly. The reason why larger populations are harmful lies in the fact that larger populations may temporarily decrease selective pressure on parts of the population. This allows unfavorable mutations to accumulate in single individuals and their descendants. If the population moves sufficiently fast through the search space, such unfavorable descendants can become ancestors of future generations, and the bad mutations are preserved. Remarkably, this effect only occurs if the population renews itself sufficiently fast, which can only happen far away from the optimum. This is counter-intuitive since usually optimization gets harder as we approach the optimum.
Moreover, Lengler and Schaller pointed out an interesting connection between functions and a dynamic optimization problem in @cite_19 , which is arguably more natural. In that paper, the algorithm should optimize a linear function with positive weights, but the weights of the objective function are re-drawn each round (independently and identically distributed). This setting is similar to monotone functions, since a one-bit is always preferable over a zero-bit, and the all-one string is always the global optimum. However, the weight of each bit changes from round to round, which somewhat resembles that the function switches between different hot topics as the algorithm progresses. @cite_19 the was studied, and the behavior in the dynamic setting is very similar to the behavior on functions. It remains open whether the effects observed in our paper carry over to this dynamic setting.
@cite_19
2914741526 2109000177 2263717697 2236345491
We study the well-known black-box optimisation algorithm (1+1)-EA on a novel type of noise model. In our noise model, the fitness function is linear with positive weights, but the absolute values of the weights may fluctuate in each round. Thus in every state, the fitness function indicates that one-bits are preferred over zero-bits. In particular, hillclimbing heuristics should be able to find the optimum fast. We show that the (1+1)-EA indeed finds the optimum in time @math if the mutation parameter is @math for a constant @math However, we also show that for @math the (1+1)-EA needs superpolynomial time to find the optimum. Thus the choice of mutation parameter is critical even for optimisation tasks in which there is a clear path to the the optimum. A similar threshold phenomenon has recently been shown for noise-free monotone fitness functions. Extending previous analyses on function classes like linear functions, we analyze how the simple 1+1 evolutionary algorithm optimizes pseudo-Boolean functions that are strictly monotonic. These functions have the property that whenever only 0-bits are changed to 1, then the objective value strictly increases. Contrary to what one would expect, not all of these functions are easy to optimize. The choice of the constant c in the mutation probability pn=c n can make a decisive difference. We show that if c iterations. For c=1, we can still prove an upper bound of On3 2. However, for , we present a strictly monotonic function such that the 1+1 EA with overwhelming probability needs iterations to find the optimum. This is the first time that we observe that a constant factor change of the mutation probability changes the runtime by more than a constant factor. We consider the problem of maximizing a (non-monotone) submodular function subject to a cardinality constraint. In addition to capturing well-known combinatorial optimization problems, e.g., Max-k-Coverage and Max-Bisection, this problem has applications in other more practical settings such as natural language processing, information retrieval, and machine learning. In this work we present improved approximations for two variants of the cardinality constraint for non-monotone functions. When at most k elements can be chosen, we improve the current best 1 e -- o(1) approximation to a factor that is in the range [1 e + 0.004, 1 2], achieving a tight approximation of 1 2 -- o(1) for k = n 2 and breaking the 1 e barrier for all values of k. When exactly k elements must be chosen, our algorithms improve the current best 1 4 -- o(1) approximation to a factor that is in the range [0.356, 1 2], again achieving a tight approximation of 1 2 -- o(1) for k = n 2. Additionally, some of the algorithms we provide are very fast with time complexities of O(nk), as opposed to previous known algorithms which are continuous in nature, and thus, too slow for applications in the practical settings mentioned above. Our algorithms are based on two new techniques. First, we present a simple randomized greedy approach where in each step a random element is chosen from a set of "reasonably good" elements. This approach might be considered a natural substitute for the greedy algorithm of Nemhauser, Wolsey and Fisher [45], as it retains the same tight guarantee of 1--1 e for monotone objectives and the same time complexity of O(nk), while giving an approximation of 1 e for general non-monotone objectives (while the greedy algorithm of Nemhauser et. al. fails to provide any constant guarantee). Second, we extend the double greedy technique, which achieves a tight 1 2 approximation for unconstrained submodular maximization, to the continuous setting. This allows us to manipulate the natural rates by which elements change, thus bounding the total number of elements chosen. A wide range of AI problems, such as sensor placement, active learning, and network influence maximization, require sequentially selecting elements from a large set with the goal of optimizing the utility of the selected subset. Moreover, each element that is picked may provide stochastic feedback, which can be used to make smarter decisions about future selections. Finding efficient policies for this general class of adaptive optimization problems can be extremely hard. However, when the objective function is adaptive monotone and adaptive submodular, a simple greedy policy attains a 1 - 1 e approximation ratio in terms of expected utility. Unfortunately, many practical objective functions are naturally non-monotone; to our knowledge, no existing policy has provable performance guarantees when the assumption of adaptive monotonicity is lifted. We propose the adaptive random greedy policy for maximizing adaptive submodular functions, and prove that it retains the aforementioned 1 - 1 e approximation ratio for functions that are also adaptive monotone, while it additionally provides a 1 e approximation ratio for nonmonotone adaptive submodular functions. We showcase the benefits of adaptivity on three real-world network data sets using two non-monotone functions, representative of two classes of commonly encountered non-monotone objectives.