Neural Architecture Search as Multiobjective Optimization Benchmarks: Problem Formulation and Performance Assessment

August 08, 2022 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation

๐Ÿ’€ CAUSE OF DEATH: 404 Not Found
Code link is broken/dead
Authors Zhichao Lu, Ran Cheng, Yaochu Jin, Kay Chen Tan, Kalyanmoy Deb arXiv ID 2208.04321 Category cs.NE: Neural & Evolutionary Cross-listed cs.CV Citations 77 Venue IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation Repository https://github.com/EMI-Group/EvoXBench}{\rm{here}}$ Last Checked 2 months ago
Abstract
The ongoing advancements in network architecture design have led to remarkable achievements in deep learning across various challenging computer vision tasks. Meanwhile, the development of neural architecture search (NAS) has provided promising approaches to automating the design of network architectures for lower prediction error. Recently, the emerging application scenarios of deep learning have raised higher demands for network architectures considering multiple design criteria: number of parameters/floating-point operations, and inference latency, among others. From an optimization point of view, the NAS tasks involving multiple design criteria are intrinsically multiobjective optimization problems; hence, it is reasonable to adopt evolutionary multiobjective optimization (EMO) algorithms for tackling them. Nonetheless, there is still a clear gap confining the related research along this pathway: on the one hand, there is a lack of a general problem formulation of NAS tasks from an optimization point of view; on the other hand, there are challenges in conducting benchmark assessments of EMO algorithms on NAS tasks. To bridge the gap: (i) we formulate NAS tasks into general multi-objective optimization problems and analyze the complex characteristics from an optimization point of view; (ii) we present an end-to-end pipeline, dubbed $\texttt{EvoXBench}$, to generate benchmark test problems for EMO algorithms to run efficiently -- without the requirement of GPUs or Pytorch/Tensorflow; (iii) we instantiate two test suites comprehensively covering two datasets, seven search spaces, and three hardware devices, involving up to eight objectives. Based on the above, we validate the proposed test suites using six representative EMO algorithms and provide some empirical analyses. The code of $\texttt{EvoXBench}$ is available from $\href{https://github.com/EMI-Group/EvoXBench}{\rm{here}}$.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Neural & Evolutionary

R.I.P. ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted

LSTM: A Search Space Odyssey

Klaus Greff, Rupesh Kumar Srivastava, ... (+3 more)

cs.NE ๐Ÿ› IEEE TNNLS ๐Ÿ“š 6.0K cites 11 years ago

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ’€ 404 Not Found