Absolute Ranking: An Essential Normalization for Benchmarking Optimization Algorithms
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluating performance across optimization algorithms on many problems presents a complex challenge due to the diversity of numerical scales involved. Traditional data processing methods, such as hypothesis testing and Bayesian inference, often employ ranking-based methods to normalize performance values across these varying scales. However, a significant issue emerges with this ranking-based approach: the introduction of new algorithms can potentially disrupt the original rankings. This paper extensively explores the problem, making a compelling case to underscore the issue and conducting a thorough analysis of its root causes. These efforts pave the way for a comprehensive examination of potential solutions. Building on this research, this paper introduces a new mathematical model called "absolute ranking" and a sampling-based computational method. These contributions come with practical implementation recommendations, aimed at providing a more robust framework for addressing the challenge of numerical scale variation in the assessment of performance across multiple algorithms and problems.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Sep 2024.
Builds on
4 of 24 references.
References · 4
- 2016Time for a change: a tutorial for comparing multiple classifiers through Bayesian analysiscited by 92
- 2022Efficient computation of rankings from pairwise comparisonscited by 31
- 2020Recent Trends in the Use of Statistical Tests for Comparing Swarm and Evolutionary Computing Algorithms: Practical Guidelines and a Critical Reviewcited by 14
- 2018The Schulze Method of Votingcited by 7
Built on by
Not cited yet.