MOAZ: A Multi-Objective AutoML-Zero Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automated machine learning (AutoML) greatly eases human efforts in architecture engineering. However, mainstream AutoML methods like neural architecture search (NAS) are customized for well-designed search spaces wherein promising architectures are densely distributed. In contrast, AutoML-Zero builds machine-learning algorithms using basic primitives and can explore novel architectures beyond human knowledge. AutoML-Zero shows the potential to deploy machine learning systems by not taking advantage of either feature engineering or architectural engineering. In its current form, it only optimizes a single objective like accuracy and has no mechanism to ensure that the constraints of real-world applications are satisfied. We propose a multi-objective variant of AutoML-Zero called MOAZ, that distributes solutions on a Pareto front by trading off accuracy against the computational complexity of the machine learning algorithm. In addition to generating different Pareto-optimal solutions, MOAZ can effectively explore the sparse search space to improve search efficiency. Experimental results on linear regression tasks show MOAZ reduces the median complexity by 87.4% compared to AutoML-Zero while accelerating the median target performance achievement speed by 82%. In addition, our preliminary results on non-linear regression tasks show the potential for further improvements in search accuracy and for reducing the need for human intervention in AutoML.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".