aiqbench analysis
This research proposes a geometric probing framework to enhance automated algorithm selection in continuous black-box optimization, offering complementary insights beyond traditional feature extraction methods. By encoding multi-scale objective-value maps with validity-aware convolutional processing, the study demonstrates improved solver-performance prediction and transferability across problem sets. The work advances the field of machine learning by addressing how limited probing budgets can be optimally utilized to represent complex optimization landscapes.
Geometric Probing for Algorithm Selection in Continuous Black-Box Optimization
arXiv:2604.09095v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Automated algorithm selection for continuous black-box optimization depends on what information is acquired from a problem under a limited probing budget and how that information is represented. We introduce a geometric probing framework that samples multi-scale two-dimensional restrictions across location, orientation, and scale, and encodes their normalized objective-value maps with validity-aware convolutional processing and permutation-invariant aggregation. We compare our method with classical ELA and Deep-ELA under matched budgets, within-problem and problem-level transfer, fusion, representation, and budget analyses. We further disentangle probe acquisition from probe processing by controlled ablation. The results show that the proposed visual representation exposes solver-performance information complementary to ELA-family features and retains a relative advantage for relative expected runtime under problem-level transfer, while greater coverage, feature richness, or predictive accessibility alone does not guarantee better selection.
Abstract:Automated algorithm selection for continuous black-box optimization depends on what information is acquired from a problem under a limited probing budget and how that information is represented. We introduce a geometric probing framework that samples multi-scale two-dimensional restrictions across location, orientation, and scale, and encodes their normalized objective-value maps with validity-aware convolutional processing and permutation-invariant aggregation. We compare our method with classical ELA and Deep-ELA under matched budgets, within-problem and problem-level transfer, fusion, representation, and budget analyses. We further disentangle probe acquisition from probe processing by controlled ablation. The results show that the proposed visual representation exposes solver-performance information complementary to ELA-family features and retains a relative advantage for relative expected runtime under problem-level transfer, while greater coverage, feature richness, or predictive accessibility alone does not guarantee better selection.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Optimization and Control (math.OC)
arXiv:2604.09095 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2604.09095v4 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.09095 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 225 words
Related coverage
Latent reasoning architectures would likely undermine CoT, our strongest oversight tool
AI Alignment Forum · Sep 23, 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Sep 18, 2026
A Mike's-Eye View of ARC's Research
AI Alignment Forum · Jun 9, 2026
Notes on Algorithms
LessWrong · Jun 10, 2026