Leaderboard
The leaderboard displays the top teams/participants ranked according to their best valid score on the rehearsal competition conducted every week. Additionally, the scores per domain are given as bar plots; and the Top 3 Plot shows the distribution of points obtained by the top 3 entries across the domains. A more detailed explanation about how the ranks are calculated, is given below.It is important to note that we do not verify these results. Therefore, the leaderboard suggests the performance of different algorithms but is not a final arbiter for winning the competition prize. The final competition will also consider hidden instances and hidden domains. Furthermore, all the competing submissions will be run on a standard machine therefore creating a "level playing field".
To submit an entry to the Leaderboard, please follow the relevant Leaderboard Rules and Leaderboard Submission details.
| Algorithm |
Author/Team |
Score |
Date |
Affiliation |
|
| 1 |
PHunter4 | Fan Xue | 204.28 | 07/06/11 |
Hong Kong Polytechnic U., Hong Kong |
| 2 |
ISEA2 | Jiri Kubalik | 177.28 | 25/05/11 | Czech Technical University, Czech Rep. |
| 3 |
HAHA1 | Andreas Lehrbaum | 166.78 | 28/04/11 | Vienna University of Technology, Austria |
| 4 |
TW4 | Hsiao Ping-Che | 130.20 | 07/06/11 |
National Taiwan University, Taiwan |
| 5 |
basic-test | Franco Mascia | 125.67 | 28/05/11 | Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium |
| 6 |
ADHS1 | Mustafa Misir | 120.08 | 06/05/11 | KaHo Sint-Lieven, Belgium |
| 7 |
SALS | He Jiang | 100.33 | 07/06/11 |
Dalian University of Technology, China |
| 8 |
ML | Mathieu Larose | 88.67 | 07/06/11 |
Université de Montréal, Canada |
| 9 |
HAEA | Jonatan Gomez | 78.07 | 07/06/11 |
Univ. Nacional de Colombia, Colombia |
| 10 | SEA2 | David Meignan | 69.00 | 19/04/11 | Polytechnique Montréal, Canada |
| 11 |
AVEG_Nep | Tommaso Urli | 63.17 | 07/06/11 |
University of Udine, Italy |
| 12 |
MCHH | Kent
McClymont |
58.50 | 07/06/11 |
University of Exeter,
UK |
| 13 |
XCJ |
Kamran Shafi | 46.28 |
07/06/11 |
University of New South
Wales,
Australia |
| 14 |
FPA1 | CS-PUT | 43.15 | 04/05/11 | Poznan University of Technology, Poland |
| 15 |
SelfSearch | Jawad Elomari | 36.00 |
07/06/11 | Warwick University, UK |
| 16 |
GISS0 | Karim A. Touma | 34.53 | 07/04/11 | University of Santiago de Chile, Chile |
| 17 |
Ant-Q | Imen
Khamassi |
18.00 | 07/06/11 |
University of Tunisia,
Tunisia |
- Leaderboard submissions are now closed (08 June 2011).
- The last leaderboard update (09 June 2011), contains a single entry per participant/team (the most recent submission).
- As a reference, the current top 3 leaderboard
entries:
PHunter4, ISEA2 and HAHA1, score above 340.00 points
when
competing (separately) against the 8 ASAP default
hyper-heuristics
using the ScoreCalculator.java
or MultipleScoreCalculator.java
programs.
- The ASAP default hyper-heuristics are no longer included in the leaderboard since 19/05/2011.
- The maximum possible cross-domain leaderboard score for an algorithm is 400.00 (10 points for each of the 40 instances), which indicates that there is still room for improvement.
Scores per Domain
In order to give more information on the algorithms' performance, the plots below illustrate the the scores for the 17 leaderboard entries on each domain. The maximum possible score per domain is 100.00 (10 points for each of the 10 training instances).Max-SAT
Bin Packing
Personnel Scheduling
Note that the results for Personnel Scheduling should no longer be considered for comparitive purposes due to serious errors relating to the objective function!
Flow Shop
[Top]
The Top 3 Plot
Note that the results for Personnel Scheduling should no longer be considered for comparitive purposes due to serious errors relating to the objective function!
This plot shows the total score, and the points obtained per domain, for the 3 top Leadearboard entries.
How the Ranks are Calculated?
The leaderboard ranks are based on a rehearsal competition conducted every week among all the submitted entries.The rehearsal competition considers the complete set of results submitted. That is, the 40 numbers corresponding to the best objective values obtained on the 40 competition training instances (10 per domain). These values are then used for calculating the scores using the Formula 1 point system (see the source code in MultipleScoreCalculator.java). There are 10 instances (events) per domain. The maximum score is therefore 100 per domain, and 400 for the total leaderboard score.
[Top]
Last Updated: 17 March 2019, by Warren G. Jackson. (Previous update 09 June 2011, by Gabriela Ochoa.)
