Online Selection of CMA-ES Variants
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In the field of evolutionary computation, one of the most challenging topics is algorithm selection. Knowing which heuristics to use for which optimization problem is key to obtaining high-quality solutions. We aim to extend this research topic by taking a first step towards a selection method for adaptive CMA-ES algorithms. We build upon the theoretical work done by van Rijn textitet al. [PPSN'18], in which the potential of switching between different CMA-ES variants was quantified in the context of a modular CMA-ES framework. We demonstrate in this work that their proposed approach is not very reliable, in that implementing the suggested adaptive configurations does not yield the predicted performance gains. We propose a revised approach, which results in a more robust fit between predicted and actual performance. The adaptive CMA-ES approach obtains performance gains on 18 out of 24 tested functions of the BBOB benchmark, with stable advantages of up to 23%. An analysis of module activation indicates which modules are most crucial for the different phases of optimizing each of the 24 benchmark problems. The module activation also suggests that additional gains are possible when including the (B)IPOP modules, which we have excluded for this present work.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 16 Apr 2019.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 4; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 3.
11 papers.
- 2022Automated Dynamic Algorithm Configurationcited by 37
- 2022A Survey of Methods for Automated Algorithm Configurationcited by 29
- 2021DACBench: A Benchmark Library for Dynamic Algorithm Configurationcited by 28
- 2021Black-box adversarial attacks using Evolution Strategiescited by 11
- 2022Theory-inspired Parameter Control Benchmarks for Dynamic Algorithm Configurationcited by 11
- 2023To Switch or not to Switch: Predicting the Benefit of Switching between Algorithms based on Trajectory Featurescited by 9
- 2022The Importance of Landscape Features for Performance Prediction of Modular CMA-ES Variantscited by 5
- 2025On the Importance of Reward Design in Reinforcement Learning-based Dynamic Algorithm Configuration: A Case Study on OneMax with (1+(λ,λ))-GAcited by 5
- 2025Sequential Multi-Agent Dynamic Algorithm Configurationcited by 3
- 2025Deep Reinforcement Learning for Dynamic Algorithm Configuration: A Case Study on Optimizing OneMax with the (1+(λ,λ))-GAcited by 1
- 2021Structure Parameter Optimized Kernel Based Online Prediction with a Generalized Optimization Strategy for Nonstationary Time Seriescited by 0
- 2025Deep Reinforcement Learning for Dynamic Algorithm Configuration: A Case Study on Optimizing OneMax with the (1+(λ,λ))-GA3 Dec 2025
- 2025Sequential Multi-Agent Dynamic Algorithm Configuration27 Oct 2025
- 2025On the Importance of Reward Design in Reinforcement Learning-based Dynamic Algorithm Configuration: A Case Study on OneMax with (1+(λ,λ))-GA27 Feb 2025
- 2023To Switch or not to Switch: Predicting the Benefit of Switching between Algorithms based on Trajectory Features17 Feb 2023
- 2022Automated Dynamic Algorithm Configuration27 May 2022
- 2022The Importance of Landscape Features for Performance Prediction of Modular CMA-ES Variants15 Apr 2022
- 2022Theory-inspired Parameter Control Benchmarks for Dynamic Algorithm Configuration7 Feb 2022
- 2022A Survey of Methods for Automated Algorithm Configuration3 Feb 2022
- 2021Structure Parameter Optimized Kernel Based Online Prediction with a Generalized Optimization Strategy for Nonstationary Time Series18 Aug 2021
- 2021DACBench: A Benchmark Library for Dynamic Algorithm Configuration18 May 2021
- 2021Black-box adversarial attacks using Evolution Strategies30 Apr 2021