arXiv Machine Learning By Yifan Zhao, Qianyang Zhao, Xinyu Guan, Kai Wei, Yuming Deng

Nominate-then-Adjudicate: LLM-Assisted One-Pass and Per-Instance MIP Solver Tuning

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

The paper introduces a "nominate-then-adjudicate" pipeline for tuning mixed‑integer programming (MIP) solvers, where a fixed portfolio of configurations is sampled once and reused across instances, eliminating per‑instance search at inference. A 20‑feature representation maps structurally different instances to the same vector, enabling a one‑pass, zero‑solve selection process that outperforms default settings and per‑instance baselines such as ISAC+. The approach demonstrates significant practical gains, with the adjudicator achieving 538 wins over the top nominee and improving win rates against defaults from 84.9% to 90.2%.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 12

When Solvers Get Moody: Quantifying and Predicting Performance Variability in Mixed Integer Programming

The paper introduces the Weighted Variability Score (WVS), a metric that aggregates dispersion in runtime, optimality gap, LP iterations, and branch‑and‑bound nodes across repeated runs of MIP solvers. Experiments on 100 randomized runs of MIPLIB 2017 instances show a right‑skewed distribution, with many instances stable but some exhibiting large variability not explained by basic properties. A tree‑based predictor using static and root‑level features achieves a mean absolute error of 0.058 and Spearman rank correlation of 0.65, with root degeneracy, matrix structure, coefficient ranges, and presolve reductions identified as key drivers of high WVS.

By Mourchid Adegbindin, Brenda Dietrich, Jamol Pender, Andrea Lodi
arXiv AI
Aug 11

Janus: An Algorithm-Evaluator Co-Evolution Framework for LLM-Driven Discovery under Expensive Evaluation Budgets

arXiv:2608. 08189v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-driven program discovery relies on rapid evaluator feedback, but many scientific and engineering tasks require high-fidelity simulations, hardware execution, or physical experiments, making each evaluation expensive.

By Ximeng Liu, Qianlong Wang, Yingming Mao, Annan Li, Yatao Li, Shizhen Zhao, Jianmin Wu, Dawei Yin, Dou Shen
arXiv AI
Aug 20

Pairwise Ranking Outperforms Single-Action RL for Offline Explanation Selection: A Practical Lesson

The paper presents a cost‑effective approach for industrial explainable‑recommendation systems by decoupling explanation generation from selection. Candidate explanations are pre‑generated using six prompt styles and two commodity LLMs, then a lightweight CPU‑resident selector (e.g., LambdaRank) chooses the best one at request time, achieving sub‑100 ms latency without GPUs. Experiments on a 2,958‑pair Google Local subset and a 300‑pair MovieLens‑1M split show that pairwise ranking methods outperform single‑action RL baselines, while KG‑path selectors achieve near‑perfect user satisfaction scores.

By Tanay Chowdhury, Saeideh Shahrokh Esfahani
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 19

Pairwise Ranking Outperforms Single-Action RL for Offline Explanation Selection: A Practical Lesson

The paper presents a cost‑effective approach for industrial explainable‑recommendation systems by decoupling explanation generation from selection. Explanations are pre‑generated using six prompt styles and two commodity LLMs, then a lightweight CPU‑resident selector (e.g., LambdaRank) chooses the best one at request time, achieving sub‑100 ms latency without GPUs. Experiments on a 2,958‑pair Google Local subset and a 300‑pair MovieLens‑1M split show that pairwise ranking outperforms single‑action RL methods, while KG‑path selectors achieve near‑perfect unique‑output rates, and the overall end‑to‑end build cost is around $15 on commodity hardware.

arXiv AI
Aug 13

Behavior and Representation in Open-Weight Large Language Models for Combinatorial Optimization: From Feature Extraction to Algorithm Selection

arXiv:2512. 13374v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) open new perspectives for automation in optimization, yet little is known about whether their internal representations capture problem structure or algorithmic behavior.

By Francesca Da Ros, Luca Di Gaspero, Kevin Roitero