MO-SMAC: Multiobjective Sequential Model-Based Algorithm Configuration
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automated algorithm configuration aims at finding well-performing parameter configurations for a given problem, and it has proven to be effective within many AI domains, including evolutionary computation. Initially, the focus was on excelling in one performance objective, but, in reality, most tasks have a variety of (conflicting) objectives. The surging demand for trustworthy and resource-efficient AI systems makes this multiobjective perspective even more prevalent. We propose a new general-purpose multiobjective automated algorithm configurator by extending the widely-used SMAC framework. Instead of finding a single configuration, we search for a nondominated set that approximates the actual Pareto set. We propose a pure multiobjective Bayesian optimization approach for obtaining promising configurations by using the predicted hypervolume improvement as acquisition function. We also present a novel intensification procedure to efficiently handle the selection of configurations in a multiobjective context. Our approach is empirically validated and compared across various configuration scenarios in four AI domains, demonstrating superiority over baseline methods, competitiveness with MO-ParamILS on individual scenarios, and an overall best performance.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it