REVIEW 1 cited by
VEER: Enhancing the Interpretability of Model-based Optimizations
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Many software systems can be tuned for multiple objectives (e.g., faster runtime, less required memory, less network traffic or energy consumption, etc.). Optimizers built for different objectives suffer from "model disagreement"; i.e., they have different (or even opposite) insights and tactics on how to optimize a system. Model disagreement is rampant (at least for configuration problems). Yet prior to this paper, it has barely been explored. This paper shows that model disagreement can be mitigated via VEER, a one-dimensional approximation to the N-objective space. Since it is exploring a simpler goal space, VEER runs very fast (for eleven configuration problems). Even for our largest problem (with tens of thousands of possible configurations), VEER finds as good or better optimizations with zero model disagreements, three orders of magnitude faster (since its one-dimensional output no longer needs the sorting procedure). Based on the above, we recommend VEER as a very fast method to solve complex configuration problems, while at the same time avoiding model disagreement.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Accuracy Can Lie: On the Impact of Surrogate Model in Configuration Tuning
Across 29 systems, 10 models and 17 tuners, higher surrogate-model accuracy frequently fails to improve, and sometimes degrades, configuration tuning quality.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.