Learning as a Tool for Algorithm Design and Beyond-Worst-Case Analysis
summary
Shows that a learned empirical hardness model (features → runtime) predicts run time of black‑box SAT and MIP solvers with RMS error often <1 (i.e., better than order‑of‑magnitude) using random forests; uses that model to drive sequential model‑based algorithm configuration (SMAC‑style) and build portfolios (SATZilla/Hydra). Example: CPLEX/Gurobi solve ~25%/10% of FCC graph‑coloring instances under a 1‑minute cutoff, configured clasp reaches ~75%, and an 8‑solver portfolio improves further. Also yields simple interpretable rules (≈70% satisfiability accuracy) using LP‑slack features.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (17)
- 0:00Intro
- 1:03Intractability
- 2:44Motivating Question
- 10:31Overall View
- 15:13Examples: EHMs for SAT, MIP
- 19:01Modeling Algorithm Families
- 24:11Deep Optimization
- 29:59Visualizing Sequential Model-Based Optimization
- 32:56Sequential Model-based Algorithm Configuration (SMAC)
- 33:28Applications of Algorithm Configuration
- 35:09Algorithm Selection
- 40:42Hydra: Automatic Portfolio Synthesis
- 42:51Building (& Evaluating) a Feasibility Tester • Data generated Nov 2015 - Feb 2016 using - the FCC's Nov 2015 interference constraints - the FCC's "smoothed ladder" simulator - varying simulation assumptions
- 45:02Feasibility Testing via MIP Encoding
- 46:31Feasibility Testing via SAT Encoding
- 47:09Performance of the Algorithm Portfolio
- 48:10A Simple Model Beats Random Guessing
related talks
01h 14mMachine Learning For Algorithm Design
28mBack to the Future: Going Beyond Worst Case Analysis
44mMachine Learning for Faster Optimization
42mLearning What Works Best When
51mHow to Predict When Estimation is Hard: Algorithms for Learning on Graphs
01h 01mRobustness, Stochastics, Uncertainty 1
26mStop Explaining Black Box Models, Use Interpretable Models Instead
45mLLMs can't optimize schedules, but AI can!
