Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
149 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Learning to optimize: A tutorial for continuous and mixed-integer optimization (2405.15251v1)

Published 24 May 2024 in math.OC, cs.LG, and stat.ML

Abstract: Learning to Optimize (L2O) stands at the intersection of traditional optimization and machine learning, utilizing the capabilities of machine learning to enhance conventional optimization techniques. As real-world optimization problems frequently share common structures, L2O provides a tool to exploit these structures for better or faster solutions. This tutorial dives deep into L2O techniques, introducing how to accelerate optimization algorithms, promptly estimate the solutions, or even reshape the optimization problem itself, making it more adaptive to real-world applications. By considering the prerequisites for successful applications of L2O and the structure of the optimization problems at hand, this tutorial provides a comprehensive guide for practitioners and researchers alike.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (39)
  1. Balatsoukas-Stimming A, Studer C. Deep unfolding for communications systems: A survey and some new directions. In 2019 IEEE International Workshop on Signal Processing Systems (SiPS) 2019 Oct 20 (pp. 266-271). IEEE.
  2. Bergstra J, Bengio Y. Random search for hyper-parameter optimization. Journal of machine learning research. 2012 Feb 1;13(2).
  3. Berthold T. Primal heuristics for mixed integer programs (Doctoral dissertation, Zuse Institute Berlin (ZIB)).
  4. Bertsimas D, Kallus N. From predictive to prescriptive analytics. Management Science. 2020 Mar;66(3):1025-44.
  5. Condat L. A primal–dual splitting method for convex optimization involving Lipschitzian, proximable and linear composite terms. Journal of optimization theory and applications. 2013 Aug;158(2):460-79.
  6. Davis D, Yin W. A three-operator splitting scheme and its optimization applications. Set-valued and variational analysis. 2017 Dec;25:829-58.
  7. Deza A, Khalil EB. Machine learning for cutting planes in integer programming: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.09166. 2023 Feb 17.
  8. Elmachtoub AN, Grigas P. Smart “predict, then optimize”. Management Science. 2022 Jan;68(1):9-26.
  9. Ryu EK, Yin W. Large-scale convex optimization: algorithms & analyses via monotone operators. Cambridge University Press; 2022 Dec 1.
  10. Fan J, Li R. Variable selection via nonconcave penalized likelihood and its oracle properties. Journal of the American statistical Association. 2001 Dec 1;96(456):1348-60.
  11. Fischetti M, Lodi A. Local branching. Mathematical programming. 2003 Sep;98:23-47.
  12. Gogna A, Tayal A. Metaheuristics: review and application. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence. 2013 Dec 1;25(4):503-26.
  13. Gomory RE. An Algorithm for Integer Solutions to Lmear Programs. Princeton-IBM Mathematics Research Project Technical Report 1 (1958).
  14. Gomory RE. Solving linear programming problems in integers. Combinatorial Analysis 10 (1960): 211-215.
  15. Gregor K, LeCun Y. Learning fast approximations of sparse coding. In Proceedings of the 27th international conference on international conference on machine learning 2010 Jun 21 (pp. 399-406).
  16. Griewank A, Walther A. Evaluating derivatives: principles and techniques of algorithmic differentiation. Society for industrial and applied mathematics; 2008 Jan 1.
  17. Hendel G. Adaptive large neighborhood search for mixed integer programming. Mathematical Programming Computation. 2022 Jun;14(2):185-221.
  18. Hosny A, Reda S. Automatic MILP solver configuration by learning problem similarities. Annals of Operations Research. 2023 Jul 14:1-28.
  19. Hottung A, Tierney K. Neural large neighborhood search for the capacitated vehicle routing problem. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.09539. 2019 Nov 21.
  20. Ioffe S, Szegedy C. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. In International conference on machine learning 2015 Jun 1 (pp. 448-456). PMLR.
  21. Mandi J, Guns T. Interior point solving for lp-based prediction+ optimisation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 2020;33:7272-82.
  22. Jegelka S. Theory of graph neural networks: Representation and learning. In The International Congress of Mathematicians 2022.
  23. Jia H, Shen S. Benders cut classification via support vector machines for solving two-stage stochastic programs. INFORMS Journal on Optimization. 2021 Jul;3(3):278-97.
  24. Kingma DP, Ba J. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980. 2014 Dec 22.
  25. Kouni V, Panagakis Y. DECONET: an Unfolding Network for Analysis-based Compressed Sensing with Generalization Error Bounds. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing. 2023 May 3.
  26. Malitsky Y. Instance-specific algorithm configuration. Springer International Publishing; 2014.
  27. Moreau T, Bruna J. Understanding neural sparse coding with matrix factorization. In International Conference on Learning Representation (ICLR) 2017 Apr.
  28. Oberman AM, Calder J. Lipschitz regularized deep neural networks converge and generalize. arXiv preprint arXiv:1808.09540. 2018 Aug 28.
  29. Paulus M, Krause A. Learning to dive in branch and bound. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 2024 Feb 13;36.
  30. Qian H, Wegman MN. L2-Nonexpansive Neural Networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations 2018 Sep 27.
  31. Simonyan K, Zisserman A. Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556. 2014 Sep 4.
  32. Takabe S, Wadayama T. Theoretical interpretation of learned step size in deep-unfolded gradient descent. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.05142. 2020 Jan 15.
  33. Vũ BC. A splitting algorithm for dual monotone inclusions involving cocoercive operators. Advances in Computational Mathematics. 2013 Apr;38(3):667-81.
  34. Wadayama T, Takabe S. Deep learning-aided trainable projected gradient decoding for LDPC codes. In 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT) 2019 Jul 7 (pp. 2444-2448). IEEE.
  35. Wolpert DH, Macready WG. No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation. 1997 Apr;1(1):67-82.
  36. Wolsey LA. Integer programming. John Wiley & Sons; 2020 Sep 10.
  37. Yang L, Shami A. On hyperparameter optimization of machine learning algorithms: Theory and practice. Neurocomputing. 2020 Nov 20;415:295-316.
  38. Yilmaz K, Yorke-Smith N. A study of learning search approximation in mixed integer branch and bound: Node selection in scip. AI. 2021 Apr 12;2(2):150-78.
  39. Zhang J, Ghanem B. ISTA-Net: Interpretable optimization-inspired deep network for image compressive sensing. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition 2018 (pp. 1828-1837).
Citations (3)

Summary

  • The paper demonstrates how machine learning can replace hand-crafted algorithms to optimize both continuous and mixed-integer problems.
  • The paper outlines methods like algorithm unrolling and plug-and-play denoisers that accelerate convergence and improve solution quality.
  • The paper highlights a dual-phase training-deployment process that informs learned heuristics in mixed-integer programming for enhanced solver performance.

Learning to Optimize: A Tutorial for Continuous and Mixed-Integer Optimization

The paper, "Learning to optimize: A tutorial for continuous and mixed-integer optimization," authored by Xiaohan Chen, Jialin Liu, and Wotao Yin, provides a thorough overview of the emerging field of Learning to Optimize (L2O). This paper meticulously illustrates how traditional optimization approaches can be enhanced or even supplanted by data-driven machine learning models, specifically focusing on continuous and mixed-integer optimization.

Introduction and Motivations

L2O seeks to exploit patterns in data to derive optimization strategies, circumventing the limitations of hand-crafted algorithms. Traditional optimization frameworks are recognized for their rigor and convergence guarantees; however, they often fall short when tackling complex real-world problems where underlying data structures are not explicitly known. L2O leverages machine learning's adaptive capacities to accelerate convergence, improve solution quality, and even reformulate optimization problems to align more closely with real-world applications.

Key Scenarios for L2O

The paper identifies two significant scenarios where L2O can outperform classical methods:

  1. Repeated Similar Optimization Problems: When solving a class of optimization problems repeatedly (e.g., sparse coding for image patches), L2O can capitalize on learned patterns to shortcut to the solution.
  2. Difficult-to-Formulate Optimization Models: In scenarios where it's challenging to mathematically describe the optimization model (e.g., natural image priors in denoising tasks), L2O models can approximate the optimization problem more effectively than traditional methods.

Offline Training and Deployment

A critical distinction between traditional methods and L2O is the dual-phase approach—training and deployment. The training phase involves learning optimal algorithmic parameters on historical data, which, although computationally intensive, results in algorithms that provide faster or higher-quality solutions during deployment.

Paradigms in Learning to Optimize

The paper organizes L2O methods into three paradigms:

  1. Learning to Accelerate Optimization Processes: Here, machine learning models replace components of classical solvers to expedite convergence.
  2. Learning to Generate Optimization Solutions: This paradigm involves directly generating solutions using machine learning models, eschewing traditional iterative methods entirely in favor of faster approximations.
  3. Learning to Adapt Optimization Problems: This innovative approach alters the optimization problem itself to make it more amenable to machine learning solutions.

Learning to Optimize Techniques

The detailed tutorial spans various L2O techniques, such as algorithm unrolling, plug-and-play methods, and optimization as a layer in end-to-end learning frameworks.

Algorithm Unrolling

Algorithm unrolling converts an iterative optimization algorithm into a neural network by processing each iteration as a network layer. This reformulation permits the application of deep learning techniques to optimize the process. For example, in iterative shrinkage-thresholding algorithms (ISTA), transforming iterations into a neural network—like LISTA (Learned ISTA)—enables faster convergence while maintaining accuracy.

Plug-and-Play Methods

Plug-and-Play methods incorporate pre-trained denoisers, typically neural networks, into optimization routines. These methods substitute traditional components (like proximal operators) with learned models, significantly improving solution quality in image restoration tasks.

Optimization as a Layer

In end-to-end learning frameworks, optimization problems are embedded directly as differentiable layers within deep networks. This allows backpropagation through the optimization step, optimizing decisions directly with respect to the overall objective, improving the integration and performance of decision-focused learning models.

Mixed-Integer Optimization and ML4CO

Machine learning for combinatorial optimization (ML4CO) within mixed-integer programming (MIP) focuses on enhancing solvers through learned heuristics. Traditional methods like Branch and Bound (BnB), cutting-plane methods, and primal heuristics benefit from data-driven enhancements to decision-making processes, such as branching variable selection, node selection, and cut generation. For instance:

  • Branch and Bound Enhancements: ML models guide variable and node selection to minimize tree size and improve search efficiency.
  • Cutting Plane Methods: ML aids in selecting the most effective cuts, reducing the feasible set efficiently.
  • Primal Heuristics: Learning-based approaches predict good initial solutions, accelerating convergence in BnB frameworks.

Implications and Future Directions

The integration between machine learning and optimization presents a paradigm shift, promising substantial advancements in solving complex, real-world problems. Moving forward, enhancing the expressiveness and generalization of learning models, ensuring theoretical guarantees, and developing scalable training methods will be paramount. The continuous interplay between rigorous optimization techniques and adaptable machine learning models heralds an exciting future for the field of computational optimization.

In conclusion, this tutorial is a comprehensive guide for researchers and practitioners aiming to leverage the synergistic potential of machine learning and traditional optimization methods to tackle the multi-faceted challenges encountered in continuous and mixed-integer optimization.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com