Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Tudor Ivan
dblp:395/1986
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 67% Algorithms and data structures · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Mathematical optimization
evolutionary computation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Speeding Up the NSGA-II with a Simple Tie-Breaking Rule · AAAI 2025 |
Mathematical optimization › evolutionary computation
multi-objective evolutionary algorithms |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Speeding Up the NSGA-II with a Simple Tie-Breaking Rule · AAAI 2025 |
Algorithms and data structures › runtime analysis
runtime analysis of evolutionary algorithms |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Speeding Up the NSGA-II with a Simple Tie-Breaking Rule · AAAI 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
tie-breaking rule · 0.9mathematical runtime analysis · 0.9NSGA-II · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Speeding Up the NSGA-II with a Simple Tie-Breaking RuleabstractThe non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II) is the most popular multi-objective optimization heuristic. Recent mathematical runtime analyses have detected two shortcomings in discrete search spaces, namely, that the NSGA-II has difficulties with more than two objectives and that it is very sensitive to the choice of the population size. To overcome these difficulties, we analyze a simple tie-breaking rule in the selection of the next population. Similar rules have been proposed before, but have found only little acceptance. We prove the effectiveness of our tie-breaking rule via mathematical runtime analyses on the classic OneMinMax, LeadingOnesTrailingZeros, and OneJumpZeroJump benchmarks. We prove that this modified NSGA-II can optimize the three benchmarks efficiently also for many objectives, in contrast to the exponential lower runtime bound previously shown for OneMinMax with three or more objectives. For the bi-objective problems, we show runtime guarantees that do not increase when moderately increasing the population size over the minimum admissible size. For example, for the OneJumpZeroJump problem with representation length n and gap parameter k, we show a runtime guarantee of O(max {n^(k + 1), N n}) function evaluations when the population size is at least four times the size of the Pareto front. For population sizes larger than the minimal choice N = Θ(n), this result improves considerably over the Θ(N n^k) runtime of the classic NSGA-II. Benjamin Doerr, Tudor Ivan, Martin S. Krejca |
AAAI | 2 |