@inproceedings{10245, author = {{Lu, S. and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings 25. Workshop Computational Intelligence}}, pages = {{97--104}}, title = {{{Locally weighted regression through data imprecisiation}}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{10246, author = {{Ewerth, Ralph and Balz, A. and Gehlhaar, J. and Dembczynski, K. and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings 25. Workshop Computational Intelligence}}, pages = {{235--240}}, title = {{{Depth estimation in monocular images: Quantitative versus qualitative approaches}}}, year = {{2015}}, } @article{10319, author = {{Waegeman, W. and Dembczynski, K. and Jachnik, A. and Cheng, W. and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, journal = {{in Journal of Machine Learning Research}}, pages = {{3333--3388}}, title = {{{On the Bayes-Optimality of F-Measure Maximizers}}}, volume = {{15}}, year = {{2015}}, } @article{10320, author = {{Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, journal = {{Fuzzy Sets and Systems}}, pages = {{292--299}}, title = {{{Does machine learning need fuzzy logic?}}}, volume = {{281}}, year = {{2015}}, } @article{10321, author = {{Shaker, Ammar and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, journal = {{Neurocomputing}}, pages = {{250--264}}, title = {{{Recovery analysis for adaptive learning from non-stationary data streams: Experimental design and case study}}}, volume = {{150}}, year = {{2015}}, } @article{10322, author = {{Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, journal = {{Informatik Spektrum}}, number = {{6}}, pages = {{500--509}}, title = {{{From Knowledge-based to Data-driven fuzzy modeling-Development, criticism and alternative directions}}}, volume = {{38}}, year = {{2015}}, } @article{10323, author = {{Garcia-Jimenez, S. and Bustince, U. and Hüllermeier, Eyke and Mesiar, R. and Pal, N.R. and Pradera, A.}}, journal = {{IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems}}, number = {{4}}, pages = {{1259--1273}}, title = {{{Overlap Indices: Construction of and Application of Interpolative Fuzzy Systems}}}, volume = {{23}}, year = {{2015}}, } @article{10324, author = {{Senge, Robin and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, journal = {{IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems}}, number = {{6}}, pages = {{2024--2033}}, title = {{{Fast Fuzzy Pattern Tree Learning of Classification}}}, volume = {{23}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{14876, author = {{Chen, Mei-Hua and Chen, Wei-Fan and Ku, Lun-Wei}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the sixth joint Foreign Language Education and Technology Conference (FLEAT VI)}}, title = {{{Technology Enhanced Emotion Expression Learning}}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{6719, author = {{Heindorf, Stefan and Potthast, Martin and Stein, Benno and Engels, Gregor}}, booktitle = {{SIGIR}}, isbn = {{9781450336215}}, pages = {{831--834}}, publisher = {{ACM}}, title = {{{Towards Vandalism Detection in Knowledge Bases}}}, doi = {{10.1145/2766462.2767804}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{46373, abstract = {{The need for automatic methods of topic discovery in the Internet grows exponentially with the amount of available textual information. Nowadays it becomes impossible to manually read even a small part of the information in order to reveal the underlying topics. Social media provide us with a great pool of user generated content, where topic discovery may be extremely useful for businesses, politicians, researchers, and other stakeholders. However, conventional topic discovery methods, which are widely used in large text corpora, face several challenges when they are applied in social media and particularly in Twitter – the most popular microblogging platform. To the best of our knowledge no comprehensive overview of these challenges and of the methods dedicated to address these challenges does exist in IS literature until now. Therefore, this paper provides an overview of these challenges, matching methods and their expected usefulness for social media analytics.}}, author = {{Chinnov, Andrey and Kerschke, Pascal and Meske, Christian and Stieglitz, Stefan and Trautmann, Heike}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the 20$^th$ Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS ’15)}}, isbn = {{978-0-9966831-0-4}}, pages = {{1–10}}, title = {{{An Overview of Topic Discovery in Twitter Communication through Social Media Analytics}}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{46375, abstract = {{In single-objective optimization different optimization strategies exist depending on the structure and characteristics of the underlying problem. In particular, the presence of so-called funnels in multimodal problems offers the possibility of applying techniques exploiting the global structure of the function. The recently proposed Exploratory Landscape Analysis approach automatically identifies problem characteristics based on a moderately small initial sample of the objective function and proved to be effective for algorithm selection problems in continuous black-box optimization. In this paper, specific features for detecting funnel structures are introduced and combined with the existing ones in order to classify optimization problems regarding the funnel property. The effectiveness of the approach is shown by experiments on specifically generated test instances and validation experiments on standard benchmark problems.}}, author = {{Kerschke, Pascal and Preuss, Mike and Wessing, Simon and Trautmann, Heike}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO ’15)}}, editor = {{Silva, Sara}}, isbn = {{978-1-4503-3472-3}}, pages = {{265–272}}, publisher = {{ACM}}, title = {{{Detecting Funnel Structures by Means of Exploratory Landscape Analysis}}}, doi = {{10.1145/2739480.2754642}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{46376, abstract = {{We investigate per-instance algorithm selection techniques for solving the Travelling Salesman Problem (TSP), based on the two state-of-the-art inexact TSP solvers, LKH and EAX. Our comprehensive experiments demonstrate that the solvers exhibit complementary performance across a diverse set of instances, and the potential for improving the state of the art by selecting between them is significant. Using TSP features from the literature as well as a set of novel features, we show that we can capitalise on this potential by building an efficient selector that achieves significant performance improvements in practice. Our selectors represent a significant improvement in the state-of-the-art in inexact TSP solving, and hence in the ability to find optimal solutions (without proof of optimality) for challenging TSP instances in practice.}}, author = {{Kotthoff, Lars and Kerschke, Pascal and Hoos, Holger and Trautmann, Heike}}, booktitle = {{Learning and Intelligent Optimization}}, editor = {{Dhaenens, Clarisse and Jourdan, Laetitia and Marmion, Marie-Eléonore}}, isbn = {{978-3-319-19084-6}}, pages = {{202–217}}, publisher = {{Springer International Publishing}}, title = {{{Improving the State of the Art in Inexact TSP Solving Using Per-Instance Algorithm Selection}}}, year = {{2015}}, } @article{46379, abstract = {{In multiobjective optimization, set-based performance indicators are commonly used to assess the quality of a Pareto front approximation. Based on the scalarization obtained by these indicators, a performance comparison of multiobjective optimization algorithms becomes possible. The R2 and the Hypervolume (HV) indicator represent two recommended approaches which have shown a correlated behavior in recent empirical studies. Whereas the HV indicator has been comprehensively analyzed in the last years, almost no studies on the R2 indicator exist. In this extended version of our previous conference paper, we thus perform a comprehensive investigation of the properties of the R2 indicator in a theoretical and empirical way. The influence of the number and distribution of the weight vectors on the optimal distribution of µ solutions is analyzed. Based on a comparative analysis, specific characteristics and differences of the R2 and HV indicator are presented. Furthermore, the R2 indicator is integrated into an indicator-based steady-state evolutionary multiobjective optimization algorithm (EMOA). It is shown that the so-called R2-EMOA can accurately approximate the optimal distribution of µ solutions regarding R2.}}, author = {{Brockhoff, D and Wagner, T and Trautmann, Heike}}, journal = {{Evolutionary Computation Journal}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{369–395}}, title = {{{R2 Indicator Based Multiobjective Search}}}, doi = {{10.1162/EVCO_a_00135}}, volume = {{23}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{46374, abstract = {{We consider a routing problem for a single vehicle serving customer Locations in the course of time. A subset of these customers must necessarily be served, while the complement of this subset contains dynamic customers which request for service over time, and which do not necessarily need to be served. The decision maker’s conflicting goals are serving as many customers as possible as well as minimizing total travel distance. We solve this bi-objective Problem with an evolutionary multi-objective algorithm in order to provide an a-posteriori evaluation tool for enabling decision makers to assess the single objective solution strategies that they actually use in real-time. We present the modifications to be applied to the evolutionary multi-objective algorithm NSGA2 in order to solve the routing problem, we describe a number of real-time single-objective solution strategies, and we finally use the gained efficient trade-off solutions of NSGA2 to exemplarily evaluate the real-time strategies. Our results show that the evolutionary multi-objective approach is well-suited to generate benchmarks for assessing dynamic heuristic strategies. Our findings point into future directions for designing dynamic multi-objective approaches for the vehicle routing problem with time windows. }}, author = {{Grimme, C and Meisel, S and Trautmann, Heike and Rudolph, G and Wölck, M}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the European Conference On Information Systems}}, title = {{{Multi-Objective Analysis of Approaches to Dynamic Routing Of a Vehicle}}}, year = {{2015}}, } @article{46380, abstract = {{We present methods to answer two basic questions that arise when benchmarking optimization algorithms. The first one is: which algorithm is the "best" one? and the second one is: which algorithm should I use for my real-world problem? Both are connected and neither is easy to answer. We present a theoretical framework for designing and analyzing the raw data of such benchmark experiments. This represents a first step in answering the aforementioned questions. The 2009 and 2010 BBOB benchmark results are analyzed by means of this framework and we derive insight regarding the answers to the two questions. Furthermore, we discuss how to properly aggregate rankings from algorithm evaluations on individual problems into a consensus, its theoretical background and which common pitfalls should be avoided. Finally, we address the grouping of test problems into sets with similar optimizer rankings and investigate whether these are reflected by already proposed test problem characteristics, finding that this is not always the case.}}, author = {{Mersmann, O and Preuss, M and Trautmann, Heike and Bischl, B and Weihs, C}}, journal = {{Evolutionary Computation Journal}}, number = {{1}}, pages = {{161–185}}, title = {{{Analyzing the BBOB Results by Means of Benchmarking Concepts}}}, volume = {{23}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{48838, abstract = {{The majority of algorithms can be controlled or adjusted by parameters. Their values can substantially affect the algorithms’ performance. Since the manual exploration of the parameter space is tedious – even for few parameters – several automatic procedures for parameter tuning have been proposed. Recent approaches also take into account some characteristic properties of the problem instances, frequently termed instance features. Our contribution is the proposal of a novel concept for feature-based algorithm parameter tuning, which applies an approximating surrogate model for learning the continuous feature-parameter mapping. To accomplish this, we learn a joint model of the algorithm performance based on both the algorithm parameters and the instance features. The required data is gathered using a recently proposed acquisition function for model refinement in surrogate-based optimization: the profile expected improvement. This function provides an avenue for maximizing the information required for the feature-parameter mapping, i.e., the mapping from instance features to the corresponding optimal algorithm parameters. The approach is validated by applying the tuner to exemplary evolutionary algorithms and problems, for which theoretically grounded or heuristically determined feature-parameter mappings are available.}}, author = {{Bossek, Jakob and Bischl, Bernd and Wagner, Tobias and Rudolph, Günter}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference}}, isbn = {{978-1-4503-3472-3}}, keywords = {{evolutionary algorithms, model-based optimization, parameter tuning}}, pages = {{1319–1326}}, publisher = {{Association for Computing Machinery}}, title = {{{Learning Feature-Parameter Mappings for Parameter Tuning via the Profile Expected Improvement}}}, doi = {{10.1145/2739480.2754673}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{48887, abstract = {{We evaluate the performance of a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm on a class of dynamic routing problems with a single vehicle. In particular we focus on relating algorithmic performance to the most prominent characteristics of problem instances. The routing problem considers two types of customers: mandatory customers must be visited whereas optional customers do not necessarily have to be visited. Moreover, mandatory customers are known prior to the start of the tour whereas optional customers request for service at later points in time with the vehicle already being on its way. The multi-objective optimization problem then results as maximizing the number of visited customers while simultaneously minimizing total travel time. As an a-posteriori evaluation tool, the evolutionary algorithm aims at approximating the related Pareto set for specifically designed benchmarking instances differing in terms of number of customers, geographical layout, fraction of mandatory customers, and request times of optional customers. Conceptional and experimental comparisons to online heuristic procedures are provided.}}, author = {{Meisel, Stephan and Grimme, Christian and Bossek, Jakob and Wölck, Martin and Rudolph, Günter and Trautmann, Heike}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference }}, isbn = {{978-1-4503-3472-3}}, keywords = {{combinatorial optimization, metaheuristics, multi-objective optimization, online algorithms, transportation}}, pages = {{425–432}}, publisher = {{Association for Computing Machinery}}, title = {{{Evaluation of a Multi-Objective EA on Benchmark Instances for Dynamic Routing of a Vehicle}}}, doi = {{10.1145/2739480.2754705}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{47233, author = {{Perl, Henning and Dechand, Sergej and Smith, Matthew and Arp, Daniel and Yamaguchi, Fabian and Rieck, Konrad and Fahl, Sascha and Acar, Yasemin}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security}}, publisher = {{ACM}}, title = {{{VCCFinder: Finding Potential Vulnerabilities in Open-Source Projects to Assist Code Audits}}}, doi = {{10.1145/2810103.2813604}}, year = {{2015}}, } @inproceedings{47232, author = {{Oltrogge, Marten and Acar, Yasemin and Dechand, Sergej and Smith, Matthew and Fahl, Sascha}}, booktitle = {{24th USENIX Security Symposium, USENIX Security 15, Washington, D.C., USA, August 12-14, 2015}}, editor = {{Jung, Jaeyeon and Holz, Thorsten}}, pages = {{239–254}}, publisher = {{USENIX Association}}, title = {{{To Pin or Not to Pin-Helping App Developers Bullet Proof Their TLS Connections}}}, year = {{2015}}, }