Dynamic Programming for Predict+Optimise

Authors: Emir Demirovi?, Peter J. Stuckey, Tias Guns, James Bailey, Christopher Leckie, Kotagiri Ramamohanarao, Jeffrey Chan1444-1451

AAAI 2020 | Conference PDF | Archive PDF | Plain Text | LLM Run Details

Reproducibility Variable Result LLM Response
Research Type Experimental The aims of this section are: (a) to illustrate the applicability of our approach by comparing with state-of-the-art for the predict+optimise knapsack; (b) to show the scalability of our approach on two dynamic programming problems: knapsack and shortest path for directed-acyclic graphs; and (c) to demonstrate the strength of our approach by constructing benchmarks where the linear relaxation is not an accurate indicator for the quality of the predictions.
Researcher Affiliation Academia 1University of Melbourne, Australia 2Monash University, Australia 3Data61, Australia 4RMIT University, Australia 5Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
Pseudocode Yes Algorithm 1: Compute the max of two piecewise linear functions
Open Source Code No The paper does not provide an explicit statement or link for open-source code for the described methodology.
Open Datasets Yes The predict+optimise knapsack dataset is based on two years of real-life energy price data. The data was used in the ICON energy-aware scheduling competition and a number of publications (Dooren et al. 2017; Grimes et al. 2014).
Dataset Splits Yes Training and test sets are divided at a 70%-30% ratio. For other methods, we performed 5-fold hyperparameter tuning with regret as the measure.
Hardware Specification No The paper does not provide specific hardware details (e.g., CPU/GPU models, memory, or cloud instance types) used for running experiments.
Software Dependencies No The paper does not specify software dependencies with version numbers.
Experiment Setup Yes Our coordinate descent approach optimises one parameter at a time. For other methods, we performed 5-fold hyperparameter tuning with regret as the measure.