Algorithm Selection

Electroencephalography (EEG) is a non-invasive technique for measuring neural activity and has been widely used in neuroscience applications. Recent advances in EEG foundation models have enabled strong performance across diverse neural decoding tasks. However, no single foundation model consistently performs best across datasets or individual EEG instances, while instance-level model selection remains largely unexplored. To address this limitation, we formulate EEG foundation model selection as an instance-level Algorithm Selection (AS) problem. We propose \textbf{EEG-AS}, an instance-level algorithm selection framework that characterizes each EEG instance using inference-available latent EEG embeddings, handcrafted neurophysiological features, and an anchor foundation model. During training, EEG-AS learns to reconstruct unavailable foundation-model behaviors from privileged prediction tokens conditioned on an anchor foundation model, while during inference it estimates these behaviors without executing the entire model portfolio, enabling efficient selection from seven EEG foundation models. Experiments on seven public EEG benchmarks demonstrate that EEG-AS substantially narrows the gap between the Single Best Solver (SBS) and the oracle upper bound for each instance. These results highlight the effectiveness of instance-level AS for adaptive deployment of EEG foundation models.

Characterising optimisation problem instances is a fundamental part of understanding the behaviour and performance of different algorithms as well as providing information for algorithm selection and configuration. In this paper we propose a novel approach to problem characterisation based on the representation of instances when implemented as a program. The intuition is that the complexity of the code required to express an objective function should relate to the complexity of the search landscape. We identify the Halstead volume as a measure of code complexity, which can be seen as a simplified version of the entropy of the program. Given a code implementation of the objective function, the Halstead volume and entropy can be quickly calculated using existing libraries. We apply the proposed complexity measures to the well-known BBOB optimisation problem suite and the simple feed-forward neural network training task. We also show that the measures are negatively correlated with algorithm performance and therefore show potential as predictive meta-features for algorithm selection and other problem analysis. We envisage the proposed measures as complementary to other problem characterisation approaches, but with the advantages of not requiring any sampling of the search space, being invariant to transformations, and being very quick to calculate automatically.

We study the problem of identifying the dominant arm in multi-armed bandits, where the objective is to find the action with the highest probability of exceeding the realized rewards of all other actions. Conventional mean-based and pairwise comparison-based algorithms often fail to identify the arm with the highest realized reward. To address this challenge, we introduce a novel dominant arm criterion and an efficient estimator with theoretical guarantees. Our approach relies on two key technical innovations: (i) a dominance score criterion that an arm beats the locally dominant over the partitioned reward space and (ii) a joint mixing and recycling mechanism coupled with a doubly robust estimator that guarantees simultaneous convergence of the empirical distribution functions for all arms. These key innovations pave a way to efficient computation of global arm dominance. Our proposed elimination algorithm identifies the best dominant arm with nearly optimal rate of sample complexity. Numerical experiments demonstrate that our algorithm consistently achieves exact recovery of the true dominant arm, outperforming existing baselines.

Numerous unsupervised domain adaptation (UDA) algori-thms exist, but for clinical practice, selecting the best-suited one along with proper hyperparameters often remains unclear, as the unlabeled deployment (target) domain prevents direct evaluation. We propose a label-free criterion that jointly selects the algorithm and hyperparameters for UDA. Given a pool of candidate models from multiple algorithms trained with different hyperparameters, our approach scores each candidate against an agreement reference, and selects the one with the highest score. The agreement reference is constructed in two levels without using target labels. First, we leverage multiple label-free selection signals, using each to nominate a model within every algorithm. Second, the nominated models are aggregated across algorithms to form a reference prediction for each unlabeled target sample. The candidate whose predictions agree most with this reference is then selected for deployment. Experimental results on four brain MRI and four chest X-ray datasets across seven clinically relevant transfer scenarios show that our method achieves better selection performance than other methods and remains effective across different algorithm pools. Our approach takes a step towards practical, label-free algorithm selection for clinical deployment of UDA.

Automated algorithm selection in black-box optimization typically relies on supervised models that map landscape features to algorithm performance labels. Such models are costly to train, benchmark-dependent, and often fail to generalize to unseen problem classes. We study an unsupervised alternative: multi-kernel clustering over heterogeneous landscape representations, in which problem instances are grouped without using performance labels in the clustering stage, and the resulting clusters are mapped post hoc to solver recommendations through a strictly separated three-stage evaluation protocol. Drawing on two decades of advances in multiple kernel learning, we adopt a multi-kernel k-means formulation that jointly learns cluster assignments and kernel weights over four heterogeneous landscape views: ELA, DeepELA, DoE2Vec, and TransOptAS. On affine BBOB-derived selector tasks for Differential Evolution (DE) and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) at a fixed evaluation budget, we report mean plus or minus standard deviation selector profiles over 50 independent random seeds for stochastic configurations. Multi-kernel clustering obtains the strongest mean profile on the DE portfolio and remains competitive with, and nominally ahead of, the leading baselines on the more compressed PSO portfolio, where differences among the best methods are small relative to stochastic variation. In representative median-seed runs used for visualization, the learned kernel weights retain ELA and TransOptAS while assigning zero weight to DeepELA and DoE2Vec, providing a task-specific interpretation of which representations are retained by the multi-kernel model for selector-oriented grouping.

Automated Algorithm Selection (AS) aims to improve problem-solving performance by selecting, for each problem instance, the most suitable algorithm from a predefined portfolio. This is particularly relevant to the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP), where solver performance is strongly instance-dependent. We introduce GNNAS-TSP, a Graph Neural Network (GNN)-based AS framework that learns TSP instance representations directly from raw graph data, avoiding manual feature engineering. GNNAS-TSP formulates AS as a joint cost-prediction and ranking task. We evaluate cost-based (mean squared error (MSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and Huber), rank-based (RankNet, ListNet, and LambdaRank), and hybrid learning objectives for a portfolio comprising Chained Lin-Kernighan, Edge Assembly Crossover, Lin-Kernighan-Helsgaun, Multiagent Optimization System, and Concorde. Experiments use fixed computational budgets of 10 and 60 seconds. On the held-out test set, the selected configurations improve on the Single Best Solver (SBS) in normalized solution cost at both budgets. For the 10s budget, AS achieves substantial and statistically significant cost improvement over SBS. Overall, the results suggest that GNNAS-TSP is a useful meta-solving strategy when exploitable variation exists across solver performance.

A/B testing is the gold standard for selecting the better algorithm in online services. While offline evaluation has attracted attention as a safer alternative due to the high experimental costs and the potential risk of degrading user experience and revenue in A/B testing, it is widely recognized that the estimation accuracy of offline evaluation is substantially lower. As a result, final selection decisions are typically made through A/B testing. Contrary to this conventional view, we reveal a counterintuitive phenomenon in which A/B testing can produce a higher algorithm selection error rate than offline evaluation. This occurs because the sample mean estimator used in A/B testing does not induce positive correlation, which is crucial for reducing critical selection errors, namely underestimating the truly superior algorithm and overestimating the truly inferior one. In contrast, offline evaluation methods unintentionally generate this beneficial correlation by relying on shared offline data when estimating and comparing the performance of multiple algorithms. Building on this insight, we propose an estimator that intentionally induces positive correlation to improve algorithm selection in A/B testing. The key idea is to introduce a hypothetical middle algorithm and to estimate the performance difference between algorithms A, M, and B in a stepwise manner using shared data at each step. This approach enables the application of offline evaluation techniques in each step, thereby inducing positive correlation and reducing critical selection errors. Furthermore, we derive the optimal middle algorithm regarding the resulting variance and analyze its advantages over existing methods through bias-variance analysis. Experiments on real-world data demonstrate that our estimator achieves the same selection error rate as existing approaches while using only one half of the A/B testing data.

The global elimination of cervical cancer is a key public health goal set by the World Health Organization (WHO), with screening programs reducing mortality by up to 80%. However, access to experts and biopsy services is limited in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs). Deep learning (DL)-based algorithms offer promising support for screening, but most existing approaches have been developed and validated on private datasets from single countries. We present the first DL-based approach to cervical cancer screening validated on data from multiple countries. Technically, we phrase the problem of detecting and classifying lesions in colposcopy images as a multi-task learning problem, in which we simultaneously perform image-level classification and lesion segmentation. Our model was trained on a private data set of acid stain colposcopy images with manually generated lesion segmentation masks and corresponding histopathological results, employing extensive data augmentation to address image variability. In an in-distribution validation with pathology results serving as ground truth, our algorithm outperformed medical experts (Balanced Accuracy: 0.68 vs 0.64) in CIN1- (Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or lower) versus CIN2+ (grade 2 or higher) classification. External validation on four colposcopy data sets from four countries featuring radical differences in prevalence and patient characteristics yielded superior performance of our method compared to baseline methods. Performance variability across countries was high with AUC values ranging from 0.54 - 0.80. Overall, algorithm performance varied with age, transformation zone (cervical area most prone to lesion development), presence of comorbidities and pathognomonic signs, with comorbidities having by far the largest negative effect. Future work should focus on improving model robustness and generalizability.

Algorithm Selection (AS) aims to automatically identify the most suitable optimization algorithm for a given problem instance by leveraging measurable problem characteristics and historical performance data. In this study, we investigate the generalization ability of AS models across both synthetic and real-world optimization landscapes. We consider two widely used academic benchmark suites (BBOB and CEC) and two real-world problem sets (robotics trajectory optimization tasks and unmanned aerial vehicle path-planning problems). Through a systematic cross-benchmark evaluation, we analyze how AS models transfer between domains, identify where generalization succeeds or breaks down, and highlight the challenges that arise when applying AS in realistic, domain-specific contexts. Our findings provide insights into the robustness of current AS approaches and inform the development of more reliable, broadly applicable AS systems for real-world optimization.

The present paper introduces a new representation-driven approach to per-instance algorithm selection, applied to black-box optimization, for automatically choosing the most promising solver from a fixed portfolio. Prior work in continuous optimization largely relies on numerical descriptors, including Exploratory Landscape Analysis features and learned embeddings such as Deep-ELA. This work studies a complementary representation: contour-map visualizations of probed landscapes. A CNN regressor takes multiple instance-specific contour views (stacked or encoded per view and aggregated) and predicts per-solver performance, enabling selection by the predicted best value. On the standard BBOB 2009 single-objective protocol, the resulting selectors significantly outperform the single best solver (SBS) and are competitive with feature-based baselines. A subsequent bi-objective evaluation under the DeepELA setting further indicates that the same image-based principle can be competitive when using windowed contour views. Overall, the results suggest that simple vision models can exploit spatial structure in probed landscapes for algorithm selection without handcrafted ELA features.

Meta-learning for algorithm selection relies on a meta-dataset in which each row corresponds to a supervised learning dataset described by meta-features and labelled with a target value that is associated with algorithm choice (typically, some function of algorithm performance). A persistent limitation is that the number of curated real-world datasets is small, resulting in sparse meta-datasets that constrain meta-learner generalisation. In this paper, we address this problem by augmenting the meta-dataset with synthetic regression datasets produced via a large language model (LLM), with generation steered toward target regions of a low-dimensionality performance space. In our experiments, we adopt a two-dimensional geometric setting defined by the cross-validated $R^2$ scores of two anchor algorithms, known as landmarkers. We compare two augmentation strategies: (1) uniform sampling, which distributes synthetic datasets across the performance space; and (2) margin-based sampling, which concentrates them near the decision boundary where landmarker preference is most ambiguous. Across 42 real-world UCI regression datasets and 730 synthetic datasets, both strategies substantially improve meta-learner performance over the unaugmented baseline under regression and multi-label evaluation formulations. However, uniform augmentation consistently outperforms margin-based augmentation, achieving a 17.47% relative reduction in Hamming loss, a 100.41% relative improvement in subset accuracy, and a +6.09% relative gain in pooled out-of-fold $R^2$. These results lead us to postulate a central thesis: the performance of algorithms resides on a low-dimensional performance manifold, whose reconstruction bias may be minimised by user-guided LLMs that seek to maximise uniform $ε$-cover, and consequently, lead to improved meta-learning for algorithm selection.

Algorithmic decision-making in high-stakes settings can have profound impacts on individuals and populations. While much prior work studies fairness in static settings, recent results show that enforcing static fairness constraints may exacerbate long-run disparities. Motivated by this tension, we study a stylized sequential selection problem in which a decision-maker repeatedly selects individuals, affecting both immediate utility and the population distribution over time. We introduce notions of group fairness for both the short and long term and theoretically analyze the trade-off between fairness and utility via the Price of Fairness (PoF). We characterize optimal and fair policies in the short term and show that the PoF can be large even when group distributions are nearly identical. In contrast, we show that long-term disparities can vanish under simple investment policies that achieve a low PoF. We also empirically validate these theoretical observations using both synthetic and real datasets.

Per-instance algorithm selection (PIAS) takes advantage of complementarity between a set of algorithms by deciding which algorithm to run on a given instance. This decision is based on features of the instances, which, in the context of black-box optimization (BBO), require a part of the optimization budget to be computed. This raises two questions: (a) from which fraction of the budget spent on feature computation does PIAS become worth it for BBO, and (b) which fraction of the budget optimizes the tradeoff between feature accuracy and PIAS performance. To this end, we perform a broad study where PIAS with varying sampling budgets for feature computation is compared to the single best algorithm on a broad range of algorithm selection scenarios. These scenarios consist of two portfolio sizes, three problem sets, 4 dimensionalities, and 10 target budgets. We find that PIAS is viable for the majority of tested scenarios, even when as much as a quarter of the total budget is spent on feature computation. The tradeoff for the fraction of the budget spent on feature computation to maximize the benefit of PIAS is highly dependent on the specific AS scenario. Further, on average 20 percent of PIAS loss to the virtual best solver is explained by the budget spent on feature computation, highlighting the importance of properly accounting for the feature budget.

In black-box optimization, a central question is which algorithm to use to solve a given, previously unseen, problem. Selecting a single algorithm, however, entails inherent risks: inaccuracies in the selector may lead to poor choices, and even well-performing algorithms with high variance can yield unsatisfactory results in a single run. A natural remedy is to split the evaluation budget across multiple runs of potentially different algorithms. Such sequential algorithm portfolios benefit from variance reduction and complementarities between algorithms, often outperforming approaches that allocate the entire budget to a single solver. While effective portfolios can be constructed post-hoc, transferring this idea to the algorithm selection setting is non-trivial. We show that a naive portfolio constructed over the full training set already outperforms the strongest traditional baseline, the virtual best solver. We then propose a simple yet effective k-nearest-neighbor-based finetuning approach to construct portfolios tailored to unseen instances, yielding further improvements and highlighting the effectiveness of portfolio selection in fixed-budget black-box optimization.

This paper investigates the length problem in sequence-level relative reinforcement learning. We observe that, although existing methods partially alleviate length-related phenomena, a more fundamental issue remains insufficiently characterized: the comparison units used during training lack inherent comparability. Building on this observation, we propose a new perspective: the length problem should not be viewed merely as a loss-scaling or normalization bias, but rather as a \emph{comparison unit construction} problem. We further establish a sample-construction-based training framework that, instead of applying post-hoc corrections to unequal-length responses, proactively constructs equal-length, alignable, and comparable training segments during generation. Within this framework, we propose EqLen, a concrete method applicable to group-relative comparison algorithms such as GRPO, GSPO, and RLOO. Through dual-track synchronous generation, prefix inheritance, and segment masking, EqLen efficiently collects effective equal-length training segments and enables stable

Network security is a critical concern in the digital landscape of today, with users demanding secure browsing experiences and protection of their personal data. This study explores the dynamic integration of Machine Learning (ML) algorithms with Software-Defined Networking (SDN) controllers to enhance network security through adaptive decision mechanisms. The proposed approach enables the system to dynamically choose the most suitable ML algorithm based on the characteristics of the observed network traffic. This work examines the role of Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) as a fundamental component of secure communication networks and discusses the limitations of SDN-based attack detection mechanisms. The proposed framework uses adaptive model selection to maintain reliable intrusion detection under varying network conditions. The study highlights the importance of analyzing traffic-type-based metrics to define effective classification rules and enhance the performance of ML models. Additionally, it addresses the risks of overfitting and underfitting, underscoring the critical role of hyperparameter tuning in optimizing model accuracy and generalization. The central contribution of this work is an automated mechanism that adaptively selects the most suitable ML algorithm according to real-time network conditions, prioritizing detection robustness and operational feasibility within SDN environments.

The Winner Determination Problem (WDP) in combinatorial auctions is NP-hard, and no existing method reliably predicts which instances will defeat fast greedy heuristics. The ML-for-combinatorial-optimization community has focused on learning to \emph{replace} solvers, yet recent evidence shows that graph neural networks (GNNs) rarely outperform well-tuned classical methods on standard benchmarks. We pursue a different objective: learning to predict \emph{when} a given instance is hard for greedy allocation, enabling instance-dependent algorithm selection. We design a 20-dimensional structural feature vector and train a lightweight MLP hardness classifier that predicts the greedy optimality gap with mean absolute error 0.033, Pearson correlation 0.937, and binary classification accuracy 94.7% across three random seeds. For instances identified as hard -- those exhibiting ``whale-fish'' trap structure where greedy provably fails -- we deploy a heterogeneous GNN specialist that achieves ${\approx}0\%$ optimality gap on all six adversarial configurations tested (vs.\ 3.75--59.24% for greedy). A hybrid allocator combining the hardness classifier with GNN and greedy solvers achieves 0.51% overall gap on mixed distributions. Our honest evaluation on CATS benchmarks confirms that GNNs do not outperform Gurobi (0.45--0.71 vs.\ 0.20 gap), motivating the algorithm selection framing. Learning \emph{when} to deploy expensive solvers is more tractable than learning to replace them.

In typical black-box optimization applications, the available computational budget is often allocated to a single algorithm, typically chosen based on user preference with limited knowledge about the problem at hand or according to some expert knowledge. However, we show that splitting the budget across several algorithms yield significantly better results. This approach benefits from both algorithm complementarity across diverse problems and variance reduction within individual functions, and shows that algorithm portfolios do NOT require parallel evaluation capabilities. To demonstrate the advantage of sequential algorithm portfolios, we apply it to the COCO data archive, using over 200 algorithms evaluated on the BBOB test suite. The proposed sequential portfolios consistently outperform single-algorithm baselines, achieving relative performance gains of over 14%, and offering new insights into restart mechanisms and potential for warm-started execution strategies.

Although the Maximum Clique Problem (MCP) has been extensively studied and features a rich ecosystem of exact solvers, empirical evidence shows that solver performance varies substantially across graph families. Consequently, selecting an appropriate algorithm for a given instance remains an open and practically important challenge that has received little systematic attention. We address this gap by developing an instance-aware selection framework that systematically combines global statistical descriptors with learned topological representations. We construct a comprehensive benchmark by evaluating four state-of-the-art exact solvers on a diverse collection of graph instances and deriving both global statistical and local structural features. An evaluation of conventional classifiers establishes Random Forest as a strong baseline and reveals that connectivity and topological features are key predictors of performance. Motivated by these observations, we introduce a dual-channel architecture that jointly leverages a Graph Attention Network for capturing local neighborhood patterns and a Multilayer Perceptron for modeling global statistical features. Extensive experiments show that the proposed dual-channel model consistently surpasses classical baselines and the single-best solver, achieving 90.43% test accuracy. These findings demonstrate the value of integrating local topological encoding with global statistical cues for combinatorial algorithm selection. Code and models are available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/GAT-MLP-7E5F.