back to main page

Results of the GECCO'2016 2-OBJ Track

"Raw" Result Data

On each problem participants were judged by the overall dominated hypervolume within the given budget of function evaluations. There were 7 participants in the field. The best function value per problem and participant (1000 times 7 double precision numbers) is listed in this text file.

Participant Ranking

Participants were ranked based on aggregated problem-wise ranks (details here and here). The following results table lists participants with overall scores (higher is better) and the sum of ranks over all problems (lower is better) The table can be sorted w.r.t. these criteria.

rank participant method name method description software paper score  sum of ranks 
1 Simon Wessing Restarted local search + SMS-EMOA link 727.395 2516
2 DIKU, University of Copenhagen UB-MO-CMA-ES unbounded population CMA-ES same as in BBOB2016 2-obj benchmark 639.549 2991
3 Poly Montreal 284.103 3851
4 Artelys Artelys Knitro Artelys Knitro used in derivative-free mode with multistart link link 252.641 4423
5 Grays 241.454 3833
6 Mohammadamin Jahanpour and Bryan Tolson Pareto archived dynamically dimensioned search (PA-DDS) Convex Hull Contribution was used as selection metric for PA-DDS link link 168.089 4376
7 Al Jimenez Curved Trajectories Algorithm (CTA) email link 53.8935 6010

Visualization of Performance Data

The following figure shows an aggregated view on the performance data.

The following figures show the same data, but separately for each problem dimension.