Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Tudor Ivan

dblp:395/1986 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Mathematical optimization
evolutionary computation
0.912025
Speeding Up the NSGA-II with a Simple Tie-Breaking Rule · AAAI 2025
Mathematical optimization › evolutionary computation
multi-objective evolutionary algorithms
0.912025
Speeding Up the NSGA-II with a Simple Tie-Breaking Rule · AAAI 2025
Algorithms and data structures › runtime analysis
runtime analysis of evolutionary algorithms
0.912025
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
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Speeding Up the NSGA-II with a Simple Tie-Breaking Rule
abstract
The 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
AAAI2