skip to main content
10.1145/2739480.2754691acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Predicting Heuristic Search Performance with PageRank Centrality in Local Optima Networks

Published:11 July 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Previous studies have used statistical analysis of fitness landscapes such as ruggedness and deceptiveness in order to predict the expected quality of heuristic search methods. Novel approaches for predicting the performance of heuristic search are based on the analysis of local optima networks (LONs). A LON is a compressed stochastic model of a fitness landscape's basin transitions. Recent literature has suggested using various LON network measurements as predictors for local search performance.

In this study, we suggest PageRank centrality as a new measure for predicting the performance of heuristic search methods using local search. PageRank centrality is a variant of Eigenvector centrality and reflects the probability that a node in a network is visited by a random walk. Since the centrality of high-quality solutions in LONs determines the search difficulty of the underlying fitness landscape and since the big valley property suggests that local optima are not randomly distributed in the search space but rather clustered and close to one another, PageRank centrality can serve as a good predictor for local search performance. In our experiments for NK-models and the traveling salesman problem, we found that the PageRank centrality is a very good predictor for the performance of first-improvement local search as well as simulated annealing, since it explains more than 90% of the variance of search performance. Furthermore, we found that PageRank centrality is a better predictor of search performance than traditional approaches such as ruggedness, deceptiveness, and the length of the shortest path to the optimum.

References

  1. K. D. Boese, A. B. Kahng, and S. Muddu. A new adaptive multi-start technique for combinatorial global optimizations. Operations Research Letters, 16(2):101--113, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. S. P. Borgatti. Centrality and network flow. Social Networks, 27(1):55--71, Jan. 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. S. Brin and L. Page. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30(1--7):107--117, Apr. 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. Choi and B. Moon. Normalization for Genetic Algorithms With Nonsynonymously Redundant Encodings. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 12(5):604--616, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. F. Daolio, S. Verel, G. Ochoa, and M. Tomassini. Local optima networks and the performance of iterated local search. Proceedings of the fourteenth international conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation conference - GECCO '12, page 369, Oct. 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. M. Franceschet. PageRank: standing on the shoulders of giants. Communications of the ACM, 54(6):92, June 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. L. C. Freeman. The Development of Social Network Analysis. Createspace, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. G. Frobenius. Über Matrizen aus nicht negativen Elementen. Sitzungsberichte Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaft, Berlin, pages 456--477, 1912.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. F. Glover. Future paths for integer programming and links to artificial intelligence. Computers & Operations Research, 13(5):533--549, Jan. 1986. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. J. He, C. Reeves, C. Witt, and X. Yao. A note on problem difficulty measures in black-box optimization: classification, realizations and predictability. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 15(4):435--43, Jan. 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. T. Jones and S. Forrest. Fitness Distance Correlation as a Measure of Problem Difficulty for Genetic Algorithms. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. L. Kallel, B. Naudts, and C. R. Reeves. Properties of Fitness Functions and Search Landscapes. In L. Kallel, B. Naudts, and A. Rogers, editors, Theoretical Aspects of Evolutionary Computing, Natural Computing Series, pages 175--206. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. S. Kauffman and S. Levin. Towards a General Theory of Adaptive Walks on Rugged Landscapes. Journal of theoretical Biology, pages 11--45, 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. S. Kirkpatrick, C. D. Gelatt, and M. P. Vecchi. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science (N.Y.), 220(4598):671--80, May 1983.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. P. J. M. Laarhoven and E. H. L. Aarts. Simulated Annealing: Theory and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, USA, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. D. H. Lehmer. Teaching combinatorial tricks to a computer. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Applied Mathematics and Combinatorial Analysis., 1960.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. J. K. Lenstra and a.H. Rinnooy Kan. Complexity of Vehicle Routing and Scheduling Problems. Networks, 11:221--227, 1981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. K. M. Malan and A. P. Engelbrecht. Fitness Landscape Analysis for Metaheuristic Performance Prediction. In H. Richter and A. Engelbrecht, editors, Recent Advances in the Theory and Application of Fitness Landscapes, pages 103--129. Springer, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. G. Ochoa, M. Tomassini, S. Vérel, and C. Darabos. A study of NK landscapes' basins and local optima networks. In Proceedings of the 10th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation - GECCO '08, page 555, New York, 2008. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. G. Ochoa, S. Verel, and M. Tomassini. First-improvement vs. best-improvement local optima networks of nk landscapes. PPSN'10 Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Parallel problem solving from nature, I:104--113, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. O. Perron. Zur Theorie der Matrices. Mathematische Annalen1, 64(1):248--263, 1907.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. E. Pitzer and M. Affenzeller. A Comprehensive Survey on Fitness Landscape Analysis. In J. Fodor, R. Klempous, and C. P. Suárez Araujo, editors, Recent Advances in Intelligent Engineering Systems, volume 378 of Studies in Computational Intelligence, pages 161--191. Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. C. M. Reidys and P. F. Stadler. Combinatorial Landscapes. SIAM Review, 44(1):3--54, Jan. 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. F. Rothlauf. Design of modern heuristics: Principles and application. Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. P. F. Stadler. Landscapes and their correlation functions. Journal of Mathematical Chemistry, 20(1):1--45, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. F. H. Stillinger. A topographic view of supercooled liquids and glass formation. Science (N.Y.), 267(5206):1935--9, Mar. 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. E. Weinberger. Correlated and Uncorrelated Fitness Landscapes and How to Tell the Difference. Biological cybernetics, 336:325--336, 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. S. Wright. The roles of mutation, inbreeding, crossbreeding, and selection in evolution. In Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of Genetics, pages 356--366, 1932.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Predicting Heuristic Search Performance with PageRank Centrality in Local Optima Networks

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            GECCO '15: Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation
            July 2015
            1496 pages
            ISBN:9781450334723
            DOI:10.1145/2739480

            Copyright © 2015 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 11 July 2015

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            GECCO '15 Paper Acceptance Rate182of505submissions,36%Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

            Upcoming Conference

            GECCO '24
            Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
            July 14 - 18, 2024
            Melbourne , VIC , Australia

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader