![Page 1: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms & Computational Experiments
Challenge
Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next
August 22nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki, Finland
![Page 2: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
History of PACE
PACE was conceived in Fall 2015, borne from the feeling that:
“parameterized algorithmics should have a greater impact on practice”
Inspired by success of SAT-solving competitions
2015-2016: First iteration• Track A: TREEWIDTH
• Track B: FEEDBACK VERTEX SET
2016-2017: Second iteration• Track A: TREEWIDTH
• Track B: MINIMUM FILL-IN
2017-2018: Third iteration [STEINER TREE]
![Page 3: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Goals
Investigate the applicability of algorithmic ideas from parameterized algorithmics
1. provide bridge between algorithm theory and algorithm engineering practice
2. inspire new theoretical developments
3. investigate the competitiveness of analytical and design frameworks
4. produce universally accessible libraries of implementations & benchmark inputs
5. encourage dissemination of the findings in scientific papers
![Page 4: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Publications following the second PACE
4
![Page 5: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Publications following the second PACE
5
![Page 6: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Publications following the second PACE
6
![Page 7: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Publications following the second PACE
7
![Page 8: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Publications following the second PACE
8
![Page 9: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Publications following the second PACE
9
![Page 10: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Publications following the second PACE
1
![Page 11: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Program committee chairs for 2017-2018:
Édouard Bonnet ENS de Lyon
Florian Sikkora Université Paris-Dauphine
Steering committee
Holger Dell Saarland Informatics Campus
Bart M. P. Jansen* Eindhoven University of Technology
Thore Husfeldt ITU Copenhagen and Lund University
Petteri Kaski Aalto University
Christian Komusiewicz Philipps-Universität Marburg
Frances A. Rosamond University of Bergen
10
People behind PACE
![Page 12: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Sponsors for prizes & travel
11
TheNetworkCenter.nl
![Page 13: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
HOW IT WENT & WHO WON
![Page 14: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
>>> The 3rd Parameterized Algorithms and ComputationalExperiments Challenge: Steiner Tree
Name: Édouard Bonnet and Florian Sikora (ENS de Lyon andUniversité Paris-Dauphine)Date: August 22nd 2018, Helsinki
![Page 15: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
>>> Challenge Problem: Steiner Tree
with edge weights
terminal
steiner vertex
find the lightest tree spanning the terminals
![Page 16: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
>>> Challenge Problem: Steiner Tree
with edge weights
terminal
steiner vertex
find the lightest tree spanning the terminals
![Page 17: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
>>> Why Steiner Tree?
* Real-life applications: design of VLSI, optical andwireless communication systems, transport networks.
* Among Karp's 21 NP-complete problems:one of the most fundamental graph problems
* Established benchmark and strong programs:11th DIMACS implementation challenge
* and, of course, fixed-parameter algorithms
![Page 18: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
>>> Why Steiner Tree?
* Real-life applications: design of VLSI, optical andwireless communication systems, transport networks.
* Among Karp's 21 NP-complete problems:one of the most fundamental graph problems
* Established benchmark and strong programs:11th DIMACS implementation challenge
* and, of course, fixed-parameter algorithms
![Page 19: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
>>> Choice of the tracks
n: number of verticesm: number of edgest: number of terminals
w: treewidth
Algorithms:* Dreyfus-Wagner, Erickson-Monma-Veinott 3tn + 2t(n log n + m)
* DP O∗(ww), improved to 2O(w)n by the rank-based approach* constant approximations, fixed-parameter approximations
Tracks:* Track A, few terminals
* Track B, low treewidth* Track C, heuristics
![Page 20: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
>>> Choice of the tracks
n: number of verticesm: number of edgest: number of terminalsw: treewidth
Algorithms:* Dreyfus-Wagner, Erickson-Monma-Veinott 3tn + 2t(n log n + m)* DP O∗(ww), improved to 2O(w)n by the rank-based approach
* constant approximations, fixed-parameter approximations
Tracks:* Track A, few terminals* Track B, low treewidth
* Track C, heuristics
![Page 21: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
>>> Choice of the tracks
n: number of verticesm: number of edgest: number of terminalsw: treewidth
Algorithms:* Dreyfus-Wagner, Erickson-Monma-Veinott 3tn + 2t(n log n + m)* DP O∗(ww), improved to 2O(w)n by the rank-based approach* constant approximations, fixed-parameter approximations
Tracks:* Track A, few terminals* Track B, low treewidth* Track C, heuristics
![Page 22: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
>>> Instances
and rules
100 public and 100 private instances (from Steinlib & Vienna)
* grid graphs with rectangular holes and ℓ1-weights* Wire-routing problems from industry* random sparse instances resistent to preprocessing* Rectilinear instances with low treewidth* Real-world telecommunication networks
Rules:* All tracks: 30 minutes per instance,
final score on the 100 private instances* Tracks A and B: number of solved instances* Track C: sum of the ratios opt/sol
A wrong answer disqualifies in Tracks A and B,and gives 0 for that instance in Track C
![Page 23: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
>>> Instances and rules
100 public and 100 private instances (from Steinlib & Vienna)
* grid graphs with rectangular holes and ℓ1-weights* Wire-routing problems from industry* random sparse instances resistent to preprocessing* Rectilinear instances with low treewidth* Real-world telecommunication networks
Rules:* All tracks: 30 minutes per instance,
final score on the 100 private instances* Tracks A and B: number of solved instances* Track C: sum of the ratios opt/sol
A wrong answer disqualifies in Tracks A and B,and gives 0 for that instance in Track C
![Page 24: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
>>> Selection of the instances
* Track A: few terminals, high treewidth* Track B: low treewidth, many terminals* Track C: many terminals, high treewidth, unsolved
Track E[n] E[m] E[t] median t E[w] median w
A 1.5K 8.5K 19.4 16 ≈ 100 ≈ 25B 1.5K 2.8K 606 100 14.9 19.5C 27K 48K 1114 360 ≈ 150 ≈ 50
In Track B, a tree-decomposition was given with the inputcomputed by Tamaki's and Strasser's codes of PACE 2017
![Page 25: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
>>> The OPTIL.io platform hosted all three tracks
* Many languages supported; added more upon request* Extra PACE participants among the OPTIL.io habitués* Alleviates our workload in organizing PACE
Many thanks to Szymon Wasik and Jan Badura!
![Page 26: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
>>> Participation
Country Teams Participants
Austria 2 4Brazil 1 3Canada 1 1Czechia 2 4Denmark 1 1England 1 1Finland 1 1France 4 7Germany 4 5India 6 12Japan 4 8Mexico 1 4
Netherlands 2 6Norway 2 4Poland 2 11Romania 1 3
Completesubmissions
Track A: 12Track B: 8Track C: 13
![Page 27: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
>>> Implementations
A lot of preprocessing and...
FPT algorithms:* DW(++)/EMV(++): 1st, 2nd, 4th to 9th in Track A,
2nd, 3rd, 4th in Track B* DP O∗(ww): 2nd in Track B* rank-based approach: 3rd to 8th in Track Bsolved instances that were not solved by other programs
* FPT approximation: 4th Track C
or other approaches:* Branch-and-Cut: 3rd in Track A, 1st in B, 2nd in C* Evolutionary algorithm: 1st in Track C* Iterated local search with noising: 3rd in Track C
![Page 28: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
SCIP-Jack: A general Steiner tree solver
Daniel Rehfeldt · Thorsten KochZuse Institute Berlin
Technische Universitat Berlin
Berlin Mathematical School
IPEC, Helsinki, August 2018
![Page 29: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
The Steiner tree problem in graphs
Given:. G = (V , E ): undirected graph. T ⊆ V : subset of vertices. c ∈ RE
>0: positive edge costs
A tree S ⊆ G is called Steiner tree in (G , T , c) if T ⊆ V (S)
Steiner tree Problem in Graphs (SPG)Find a Steiner tree S in (G , T , c) with minimum edge costs
∑e∈E(S)
c(e)
SPG is one of the classical combinatorial optimization problems;decision variant is one of Karp’s 21 NP-complete problems.
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 2 / 18
![Page 30: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
The Steiner tree problem in graphs
Given:. G = (V , E ): undirected graph. T ⊆ V : subset of vertices. c ∈ RE
>0: positive edge costs
A tree S ⊆ G is called Steiner tree in (G , T , c) if T ⊆ V (S)
Steiner tree Problem in Graphs (SPG)Find a Steiner tree S in (G , T , c) with minimum edge costs
∑e∈E(S)
c(e)
SPG is one of the classical combinatorial optimization problems;decision variant is one of Karp’s 21 NP-complete problems.
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 2 / 18
![Page 31: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
The Steiner tree problem in graphs
Given:. G = (V , E ): undirected graph. T ⊆ V : subset of vertices. c ∈ RE
>0: positive edge costs
A tree S ⊆ G is called Steiner tree in (G , T , c) if T ⊆ V (S)
Steiner tree Problem in Graphs (SPG)Find a Steiner tree S in (G , T , c) with minimum edge costs
∑e∈E(S)
c(e)
SPG is one of the classical combinatorial optimization problems;decision variant is one of Karp’s 21 NP-complete problems.
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 2 / 18
![Page 32: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Our submission to PACE 2018
SCIP-Jack:
. Solver for Steiner tree (and 11 related) problems
. part of the SCIP Optimization Suite
. was used with our LP solver SoPlex1 (default is CPLEX)
1current developers: Leon Eifler, Matthias Miltenberger, D.R.Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 3 / 18
![Page 33: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Framework
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 4 / 18
![Page 34: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Some facts about SCIP. general setup
I plugin based systemI default plugins handle MIPs and nonconvex MINLPsI support for branch-and-price and custom relaxations
. documentation and guidelinesI more than 500 000 lines of C code, 20% documentation
I 36 000 assertions, 5 000 debug messagesI HowTos: plugins types, debugging, automatic testingI 11 examples and 5 applications illustrating the use of SCIPI active mailing list [email protected] (300 members)
. interface and usabilityI user-friendly interactive shellI interfaces to AMPL, GAMS, ZIMPL, MATLAB, Python and JavaI C++ wrapper classesI LP solvers: CLP, CPLEX, Gurobi, MOSEK, QSopt, SoPlex, XpressI over 1 600 parameters and 15 emphasis settings
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 5 / 18
![Page 35: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
(Some) SCIP users all over the world
over 10 000 downloads per year
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 6 / 18
![Page 36: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Why not using a general MIP solver?Consider (small-scale) networkdesign instance with:|V | = 12 715|E | = 41 264|T | = 475
. CPLEX 12.7.1: Runs out ofmemory after 14 h
. SCIP-Jack: Solves to optimalityin 7.5 seconds
For larger problems CPLEX runs outof memory almost immediately(largest real-world instanceSCIP-Jack solved so far has 64million edges, 11 million vertices)
Network telecommunication design forAustrian cities, see New Real-worldInstances for the Steiner Tree Problemin Graphs (Leitner et al., 2014)
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 7 / 18
![Page 37: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Basic solution approach
. transform each SPG into Steiner arborescence problem and ...
r
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 8 / 18
![Page 38: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Basic solution approach
. transform each SPG into Steiner arborescence problem and ...
r
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 8 / 18
![Page 39: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Formulation
... use cutting plane algorithm based on flow balance directed-cutformulation:
Formulation
min cT yy(δ+
W ) > 1 for all W ⊂ V , r ∈W , (V \W ) ∩ T 6= ∅y(δ−v ) 6 y(δ+
v ) for all v ∈ V \ Ty(δ−v ) > y(a) for all a ∈ δ+
v , v ∈ V \ Ty(a) ∈ {0, 1} for all a ∈ A
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 9 / 18
![Page 40: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
SCIP-Jack
main features of SCIP-Jack for SPGs:
. very fast separator routine based on new max-flow implementation2
. preprocessing routines
. domain propagation routines
. primal and dual heuristics
. shared and distributed memory parallelizations
2Latest version was not used at PACE 2018Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 10 / 18
![Page 41: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
SCIP-Jack
main features of SCIP-Jack for SPGs:. very fast separator routine based on new max-flow implementation2
. preprocessing routines
. domain propagation routines
. primal and dual heuristics
. shared and distributed memory parallelizations
2Latest version was not used at PACE 2018Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 10 / 18
![Page 42: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
SCIP-Jack
SCIP-Jack Preprocessing
DA
nativeSCIP
DT
BT
CNS
BND
HBND
CBND NTDk
NV
SL
ACNS
SD
NPVk
AVS
SDCUNT
UNPV
NNP
BR
RPT
CT
PNT
PVD
· · ·
Parallel
distributed
shared
Relaxator
Separator
stpdual-ascentbased
nativeSCIP
PricerBranch
stp
nativeSCIP
Nodeselector
PrimalHeuristic
RSPH
RSPHSAP
GreedyMWCS
ascendprune
prune
LocalMWCS
recombination
VQ
nativeSCIP
GreedyPC
RSPHDC
DualHeuristic
LPInterface
Reader
Transformation
SPG
RMST OARMST
NWST
RPCST
PCST
RMWCS
MWCS
DCST
HCDST
GSTP
Cutpool
Propagator
stp
nativeSCIP
Writer
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 11 / 18
![Page 43: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Central feature: Reduction techniques. reduction techniques try to transform an instance to an equivalent
smaller one (e.g. by deleting edges or vertices). reduction techniques of SCIP-Jack typically reduce # edges by
more than 70 %
original instance (5000 edges) reduced instance (less edges)
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 12 / 18
![Page 44: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Central feature: Reduction techniques. reduction techniques try to transform an instance to an equivalent
smaller one (e.g. by deleting edges or vertices). reduction techniques of SCIP-Jack typically reduce # edges by
more than 70 %
original instance (5000 edges) reduced instance (less edges)Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 12 / 18
![Page 45: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Terminal regions decomposition
Example for (new) SPG reduction technique, implemented forPACE 2018:
Define distance function d : V × V 7→ R ∪ {∞}:
d(vi , vj) := inf{P(Q) | Q is a (vi , vj)-path and (V (Q) \ {vi , vj}) ∩ T = ∅}
Define decomposition H ={Hti ⊆ V | T ∩ Hti = {ti}
}of V such that for
each ti ∈ T the subgraph (Hti ,E [Hti ]) is connected.
Define radius:
rH(ti ) := min{d(ti , vk) | ∃{vj , vj} ∈ E , vj ∈ Hti , vk /∈ Hti}
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 13 / 18
![Page 46: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Terminal regions decomposition
Example for (new) SPG reduction technique, implemented forPACE 2018:
Define distance function d : V × V 7→ R ∪ {∞}:
d(vi , vj) := inf{P(Q) | Q is a (vi , vj)-path and (V (Q) \ {vi , vj}) ∩ T = ∅}
Define decomposition H ={Hti ⊆ V | T ∩ Hti = {ti}
}of V such that for
each ti ∈ T the subgraph (Hti ,E [Hti ]) is connected.
Define radius:
rH(ti ) := min{d(ti , vk) | ∃{vj , vj} ∈ E , vj ∈ Hti , vk /∈ Hti}
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 13 / 18
![Page 47: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Terminal regions decomposition (2)
PropositionLet H be a terminal regions decomposition and assume that |T | > 2. Let vi ∈ V \ T, assumefor each optimal solution S that vi ∈ V (S). Then∑
t∈T
rH(t)−max{rH(t) + rH(t′) | t, t′ ∈ T , t 6= t′}+ d(vi , v i,1) + d(vi , v i,2)
is lower bound on the weight of S.
Finding an optimal terminal regions decomposition is NP-hard!Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 14 / 18
![Page 48: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Using reduction techniques in domain propagationEach SCIP-Jack Steiner tree reduction transforms SPG (V , E , T , c)to SPG (V ′, E ′, T ′, c ′) and provides function p : E ′ → P (E ) suchthat for each (optimal) solution S ′ ⊆ E ′ to transformed problem, set⋃
e∈S′ p(e) is (optimal) solution to original problem.
ObservationLet (V , E , T , c), (V ′, E ′, T ′, c ′), and p as above. DefineE ′′ := ⋃
e∈E ′ p(e),V ′′ := {v ∈ V | ∃(v , w) ∈ E ′′, w ∈ V },T ′′ := {t ∈ T | ∃(t, w) ∈ E ′′, w ∈ V },c ′′ := c|E ′′ .Each (optimal) solution to (V ′′, E ′′, T ′′, c ′′) is (optimal) solution to(V , E , T , c).
⇒ allows to translate reductions into variable fixings duringbranch-and-bound
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 15 / 18
![Page 49: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Futher uses of reducion techniques
. Primal heuristics: Several heuristics of SCIP-Jack createsubproblems (e.g. by merging feasible solutions), reductiontechniques are vital to finding a good solution there
. Branch-and-bound: SCIP-Jack branches on vertices, providing newopportunities for reduction techniques
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 16 / 18
![Page 50: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
SCIP-Jack at PACE 2018
For PACE 2018. new reduction techniques were designed and implemented (suitable
for but not restricted to problems with few terminals)
. reduction techniques and heuristics were performed far moreaggressively to compensate for slower LP solver SoPlex
. ...still SCIP-Jack/CPLEX shows a far stronger performance
. most new algorithms are included in latest SCIP releasehttp://scip.zib.de
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 17 / 18
![Page 51: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
SCIP-Jack at PACE 2018
For PACE 2018. new reduction techniques were designed and implemented (suitable
for but not restricted to problems with few terminals). reduction techniques and heuristics were performed far more
aggressively to compensate for slower LP solver SoPlex. ...still SCIP-Jack/CPLEX shows a far stronger performance
. most new algorithms are included in latest SCIP releasehttp://scip.zib.de
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 17 / 18
![Page 52: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
SCIP-Jack at PACE 2018
For PACE 2018. new reduction techniques were designed and implemented (suitable
for but not restricted to problems with few terminals). reduction techniques and heuristics were performed far more
aggressively to compensate for slower LP solver SoPlex. ...still SCIP-Jack/CPLEX shows a far stronger performance. most new algorithms are included in latest SCIP release
http://scip.zib.de
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 17 / 18
![Page 53: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Thanks to the organizers of PACE 2018!
...thanks to NETWORKS for travel support!
...and thank you for your attention!
Thorsten Koch · Daniel Rehfeldt 18 / 18
![Page 54: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
>>> Track A results
* 1st place, 95: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 2nd place, 94: Krzysztof Maziarz and Adam Polak* 3rd place, 93: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 4th place, 92: Andre Schidler, Johannes Fichte, and
Markus Hecher
* 5th place, 67: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, MarcinMucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 6th place, 66: Suhas Thejaswi* 6th place, 66: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 6th place, 66: Johannes Varga
* 9th place, 48: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, andPrafullkumar Tale
![Page 55: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
>>> Track A results
* 1st place, 95: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 2nd place, 94: Krzysztof Maziarz and Adam Polak* 3rd place, 93: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 4th place, 92: Andre Schidler, Johannes Fichte, and
Markus Hecher
* 5th place, 67: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, MarcinMucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 6th place, 66: Suhas Thejaswi* 6th place, 66: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 6th place, 66: Johannes Varga* 9th place, 48: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale
![Page 56: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
>>> Track A results
* 1st place, 95: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 2nd place, 94: Krzysztof Maziarz and Adam Polak* 3rd place, 93: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 4th place, 92: Andre Schidler, Johannes Fichte, and
Markus Hecher
* 5th place, 67: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, MarcinMucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 6th place, 66: Suhas Thejaswi* 6th place, 66: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 6th place, 66: Johannes Varga* 9th place, 48: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale
![Page 57: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
>>> Track A results
* 1st place, 95: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 2nd place, 94: Krzysztof Maziarz and Adam Polak* 3rd place, 93: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt
* 4th place, 92: Andre Schidler, Johannes Fichte, andMarkus Hecher
* 5th place, 67: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, MarcinMucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 6th place, 66: Suhas Thejaswi* 6th place, 66: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 6th place, 66: Johannes Varga* 9th place, 48: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale
![Page 58: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Andre Schidler, Johannes Fichte, and Markus HecherTechnische Universität Wien
for
Fourth Place in Track A: Exact Steiner Tree with Few Terminals
€ 225,-
![Page 59: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
>>> Track A results
* 1st place, 95: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 2nd place, 94: Krzysztof Maziarz and Adam Polak
* 3rd place, 93: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 4th place, 92: Andre Schidler, Johannes Fichte, and
Markus Hecher
* 5th place, 67: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, MarcinMucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 6th place, 66: Suhas Thejaswi* 6th place, 66: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 6th place, 66: Johannes Varga* 9th place, 48: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale
![Page 60: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Daniel Rehfeldt and Thorsten KochZuse Institute Berlin TU Berlin
for
Third Place in Track A: Exact Steiner Tree with Few Terminals
€ 300,-
![Page 61: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
>>> Track A results
* 1st place, 95: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura
* 2nd place, 94: Krzysztof Maziarz and Adam Polak* 3rd place, 93: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 4th place, 92: Andre Schidler, Johannes Fichte, and
Markus Hecher
* 5th place, 67: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, MarcinMucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 6th place, 66: Suhas Thejaswi* 6th place, 66: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 6th place, 66: Johannes Varga* 9th place, 48: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale
![Page 62: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Krzysztof Maziarz and Adam PolakJagiellonian University
for
Second Place in Track A: Exact Steiner Tree with Few Terminals
€ 350,-
![Page 63: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
>>> Track A results
* 1st place, 95: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 2nd place, 94: Krzysztof Maziarz and Adam Polak* 3rd place, 93: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 4th place, 92: Andre Schidler, Johannes Fichte, and
Markus Hecher
* 5th place, 67: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, MarcinMucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 6th place, 66: Suhas Thejaswi* 6th place, 66: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 6th place, 66: Johannes Varga* 9th place, 48: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale
![Page 64: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Yoichi Iwata and Takuto ShigemuraNational Institute of Informatics, Japan University of Tokyo
for
First Place in Track A: Exact Steiner Tree with Few Terminals
€ 450,-
![Page 65: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
>>> Track A results - 2
* Honorable mention: Sharat Ibrahimpur solved 69 out of 100instances but was incorrect on one instance
* 11th place, 14: S. Vaishali and Rathna Subramanian* 12th place, 9: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S. Narayanaswamy,
and Rajesh Pandian M.
The winning heuristic for Track C actually solved all 100private1 instances in track A!
1it returned a wrong answer on some public instance
![Page 66: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
>>> Track B results
* 1st place, 92: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 2nd place, 77: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 3rd place, 58: Tom van der Zanden
* 4th place, 52: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 4th place, 52: Yasuaki Kobayashi* 6th place, 49: Akio Fujiyoshi
* 7th place, 33: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, MarcinMucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 33: Dilson Guimarães, Guilherme Gomes, JoãoGonçalves, and Vinícius dos Santos
![Page 67: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
>>> Track B results
* 1st place, 92: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 2nd place, 77: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 3rd place, 58: Tom van der Zanden
* 4th place, 52: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 4th place, 52: Yasuaki Kobayashi
* 6th place, 49: Akio Fujiyoshi* 7th place, 33: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, Marcin
Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 33: Dilson Guimarães, Guilherme Gomes, JoãoGonçalves, and Vinícius dos Santos
![Page 68: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
>>> Track B results
* 1st place, 92: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 2nd place, 77: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 3rd place, 58: Tom van der Zanden
* 4th place, 52: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 4th place, 52: Yasuaki Kobayashi* 6th place, 49: Akio Fujiyoshi* 7th place, 33: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, Marcin
Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 33: Dilson Guimarães, Guilherme Gomes, JoãoGonçalves, and Vinícius dos Santos
![Page 69: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
>>> Track B results
* 1st place, 92: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 2nd place, 77: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura
* 3rd place, 58: Tom van der Zanden
* 4th place, 52: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 4th place, 52: Yasuaki Kobayashi* 6th place, 49: Akio Fujiyoshi* 7th place, 33: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, Marcin
Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 33: Dilson Guimarães, Guilherme Gomes, JoãoGonçalves, and Vinícius dos Santos
![Page 70: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Tom van der ZandenUtrecht University
for
Third Place in Track B: Exact Steiner Tree with Small Treewidth
€ 300,-
![Page 71: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
>>> Track B results
* 1st place, 92: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt
* 2nd place, 77: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 3rd place, 58: Tom van der Zanden
* 4th place, 52: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 4th place, 52: Yasuaki Kobayashi* 6th place, 49: Akio Fujiyoshi* 7th place, 33: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, Marcin
Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 33: Dilson Guimarães, Guilherme Gomes, JoãoGonçalves, and Vinícius dos Santos
![Page 72: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Yoichi Iwata and Takuto ShigemuraNational Institute of Informatics, Japan University of Tokyo
for
Second Place in Track B: Exact Steiner Tree with Small Treewidth
€ 350,-
![Page 73: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
>>> Track B results
* 1st place, 92: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 2nd place, 77: Yoichi Iwata and Takuto Shigemura* 3rd place, 58: Tom van der Zanden
* 4th place, 52: Peter Mitura and Ondřej Suchý* 4th place, 52: Yasuaki Kobayashi* 6th place, 49: Akio Fujiyoshi* 7th place, 33: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba, Marcin
Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 33: Dilson Guimarães, Guilherme Gomes, JoãoGonçalves, and Vinícius dos Santos
![Page 74: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Daniel Rehfeldt and Thorsten KochZuse Institute Berlin TU Berlin
for
First Place in Track B: Exact Steiner Tree with Small Treewidth
€ 450,-
![Page 75: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
>>> Track C results
* 5th place, 98.93: Mateus Oliveira and Emmanuel Arrighi* 6th place, 98.27: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba,
Marcin Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 97.54: Stéphane Grandcolas* 8th place, 97.15: Max Hort, Marciano Geijselaers, Joshua
Scheidt, Pit Schneider, and Tahmina Begum* 9th place, 96.92: Dimitri Watel and Marc-Antoine Weisser* 10th place, 94.57: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S.
Narayanaswamy, and Rajesh Pandian M.* 11th place, 94.37: Sharat Ibrahimpur* 12th place, 82.61: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale
* 13th place, 80.73: Harumi Haraguchi, Hiroshi Arai,Shiyougo Akiyama, and Masaki Kubonoya
![Page 76: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
>>> Track C results
* 5th place, 98.93: Mateus Oliveira and Emmanuel Arrighi* 6th place, 98.27: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba,
Marcin Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 97.54: Stéphane Grandcolas* 8th place, 97.15: Max Hort, Marciano Geijselaers, Joshua
Scheidt, Pit Schneider, and Tahmina Begum* 9th place, 96.92: Dimitri Watel and Marc-Antoine Weisser* 10th place, 94.57: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S.
Narayanaswamy, and Rajesh Pandian M.* 11th place, 94.37: Sharat Ibrahimpur
* 12th place, 82.61: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, andPrafullkumar Tale
* 13th place, 80.73: Harumi Haraguchi, Hiroshi Arai,Shiyougo Akiyama, and Masaki Kubonoya
![Page 77: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
>>> Track C results
* 5th place, 98.93: Mateus Oliveira and Emmanuel Arrighi* 6th place, 98.27: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba,
Marcin Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 97.54: Stéphane Grandcolas* 8th place, 97.15: Max Hort, Marciano Geijselaers, Joshua
Scheidt, Pit Schneider, and Tahmina Begum* 9th place, 96.92: Dimitri Watel and Marc-Antoine Weisser* 10th place, 94.57: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S.
Narayanaswamy, and Rajesh Pandian M.
* 11th place, 94.37: Sharat Ibrahimpur* 12th place, 82.61: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale* 13th place, 80.73: Harumi Haraguchi, Hiroshi Arai,
Shiyougo Akiyama, and Masaki Kubonoya
![Page 78: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
>>> Track C results
* 5th place, 98.93: Mateus Oliveira and Emmanuel Arrighi* 6th place, 98.27: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba,
Marcin Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 97.54: Stéphane Grandcolas* 8th place, 97.15: Max Hort, Marciano Geijselaers, Joshua
Scheidt, Pit Schneider, and Tahmina Begum* 9th place, 96.92: Dimitri Watel and Marc-Antoine Weisser
* 10th place, 94.57: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S.Narayanaswamy, and Rajesh Pandian M.
* 11th place, 94.37: Sharat Ibrahimpur* 12th place, 82.61: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale* 13th place, 80.73: Harumi Haraguchi, Hiroshi Arai,
Shiyougo Akiyama, and Masaki Kubonoya
![Page 79: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
>>> Track C results
* 5th place, 98.93: Mateus Oliveira and Emmanuel Arrighi* 6th place, 98.27: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba,
Marcin Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 97.54: Stéphane Grandcolas* 8th place, 97.15: Max Hort, Marciano Geijselaers, Joshua
Scheidt, Pit Schneider, and Tahmina Begum
* 9th place, 96.92: Dimitri Watel and Marc-Antoine Weisser* 10th place, 94.57: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S.
Narayanaswamy, and Rajesh Pandian M.* 11th place, 94.37: Sharat Ibrahimpur* 12th place, 82.61: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale* 13th place, 80.73: Harumi Haraguchi, Hiroshi Arai,
Shiyougo Akiyama, and Masaki Kubonoya
![Page 80: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
>>> Track C results
* 5th place, 98.93: Mateus Oliveira and Emmanuel Arrighi* 6th place, 98.27: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba,
Marcin Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 97.54: Stéphane Grandcolas
* 8th place, 97.15: Max Hort, Marciano Geijselaers, JoshuaScheidt, Pit Schneider, and Tahmina Begum
* 9th place, 96.92: Dimitri Watel and Marc-Antoine Weisser* 10th place, 94.57: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S.
Narayanaswamy, and Rajesh Pandian M.* 11th place, 94.37: Sharat Ibrahimpur* 12th place, 82.61: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale* 13th place, 80.73: Harumi Haraguchi, Hiroshi Arai,
Shiyougo Akiyama, and Masaki Kubonoya
![Page 81: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
>>> Track C results
* 5th place, 98.93: Mateus Oliveira and Emmanuel Arrighi* 6th place, 98.27: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba,
Marcin Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 97.54: Stéphane Grandcolas* 8th place, 97.15: Max Hort, Marciano Geijselaers, Joshua
Scheidt, Pit Schneider, and Tahmina Begum* 9th place, 96.92: Dimitri Watel and Marc-Antoine Weisser* 10th place, 94.57: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S.
Narayanaswamy, and Rajesh Pandian M.* 11th place, 94.37: Sharat Ibrahimpur* 12th place, 82.61: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale* 13th place, 80.73: Harumi Haraguchi, Hiroshi Arai,
Shiyougo Akiyama, and Masaki Kubonoya
![Page 82: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
>>> Track C results
* 5th place, 98.93: Mateus Oliveira and Emmanuel Arrighi
* 6th place, 98.27: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba,Marcin Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 97.54: Stéphane Grandcolas* 8th place, 97.15: Max Hort, Marciano Geijselaers, Joshua
Scheidt, Pit Schneider, and Tahmina Begum* 9th place, 96.92: Dimitri Watel and Marc-Antoine Weisser* 10th place, 94.57: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S.
Narayanaswamy, and Rajesh Pandian M.* 11th place, 94.37: Sharat Ibrahimpur* 12th place, 82.61: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale* 13th place, 80.73: Harumi Haraguchi, Hiroshi Arai,
Shiyougo Akiyama, and Masaki Kubonoya
![Page 83: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
>>> Track C results
* 5th place, 98.93: Mateus Oliveira and Emmanuel Arrighi* 6th place, 98.27: Krzysztof Kiljan, Dominik Klemba,
Marcin Mucha, Wojciech Nadara, Marcin Pilipczuk, MateuszRadecki, and Michał Ziobro
* 7th place, 97.54: Stéphane Grandcolas* 8th place, 97.15: Max Hort, Marciano Geijselaers, Joshua
Scheidt, Pit Schneider, and Tahmina Begum* 9th place, 96.92: Dimitri Watel and Marc-Antoine Weisser* 10th place, 94.57: R. Vijayaragunathan, N. S.
Narayanaswamy, and Rajesh Pandian M.* 11th place, 94.37: Sharat Ibrahimpur* 12th place, 82.61: Saket Saurabh, P. S. Srinivasan, and
Prafullkumar Tale* 13th place, 80.73: Harumi Haraguchi, Hiroshi Arai,
Shiyougo Akiyama, and Masaki Kubonoya
![Page 84: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
>>> Track C results - 2
The top 4 got an average ratio above 0.997
* 1st place, 99.93: Emmanuel Romero Ruiz, Emmanuel AntonioCuevas, Irwin Enrique Villalobos López, and Carlos SeguraGonzález
* 2nd place, 99.85: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 3rd place, 99.80: Martin J. Geiger
* 4th place, 99.72: Radek Hušek, Tomáš Toufar, Dušan Knop,Tomáš Masařík, and Eduard Eiben
![Page 85: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Radek Hušek, Tomáš Toufar, Tomáš Masarík, Dušan Knop, and Eduard EibenCharles University & University of Bergen, Norway
for
Fourth Place in Track C: Heuristic Steiner Tree
€ 225,-
![Page 86: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
>>> Track C results - 2
The top 4 got an average ratio above 0.997
* 1st place, 99.93: Emmanuel Romero Ruiz, Emmanuel AntonioCuevas, Irwin Enrique Villalobos López, and Carlos SeguraGonzález
* 2nd place, 99.85: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt
* 3rd place, 99.80: Martin J. Geiger* 4th place, 99.72: Radek Hušek, Tomáš Toufar, Dušan Knop,
Tomáš Masařík, and Eduard Eiben
![Page 87: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Martin GeigerHelmut Schmidt Universität, Hamburg
for
Third Place in Track C: Heuristic Steiner Tree
€ 300,-
![Page 88: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
>>> Track C results - 2
The top 4 got an average ratio above 0.997
* 1st place, 99.93: Emmanuel Romero Ruiz, Emmanuel AntonioCuevas, Irwin Enrique Villalobos López, and Carlos SeguraGonzález
* 2nd place, 99.85: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 3rd place, 99.80: Martin J. Geiger* 4th place, 99.72: Radek Hušek, Tomáš Toufar, Dušan Knop,
Tomáš Masařík, and Eduard Eiben
![Page 89: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Daniel Rehfeldt and Thorsten KochZuse Institute Berlin TU Berlin
for
Second Place in Track C: Heuristic Steiner Tree
€ 350,-
![Page 90: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/90.jpg)
>>> Track C results - 2
The top 4 got an average ratio above 0.997
* 1st place, 99.93: Emmanuel Romero Ruiz, Emmanuel AntonioCuevas, Irwin Enrique Villalobos López, and Carlos SeguraGonzález
* 2nd place, 99.85: Thorsten Koch and Daniel Rehfeldt* 3rd place, 99.80: Martin J. Geiger* 4th place, 99.72: Radek Hušek, Tomáš Toufar, Dušan Knop,
Tomáš Masařík, and Eduard Eiben
![Page 91: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/91.jpg)
3rd Parameterized Algorithms and Computational Experiments ChallengePACE
Uniting FPT and practiceALGO/IPEC 2018 September 20 – 24 Helsinki, Finland
_________________________________Édouard Bonnet, ENS de Lyon
_________________________________Florian Sikora, Université Paris-Dauphine
2018 PACE Program Committee Co-chairs
This is to certify that the 2018 PACE Program Committee recognizes
Emmanuel Romero Ruiz, Emmanuel Antonio Cuevas, Irwin Enrique Villalobos Lopez, and Carlos Segura González
Center for Research in Mathematics, Guanajuato, Mexicofor
First Place in Track C: Heuristic Steiner Tree
€ 450,-
![Page 92: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/92.jpg)
The next PACE
PACE 2018-2019 program committee
Markus Hecher TU Wien
Johannes Fichte TU Dresden
2
![Page 93: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/93.jpg)
The next PACE
PACE 2018-2019 program committee
Markus Hecher TU Wien
Johannes Fichte TU Dresden
3
![Page 94: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/94.jpg)
PACE timeline in 2018-2019
Tentative time schedule– Today: Announcement of the PC & challenge problem– October 1st 2018: Announcement of challenge problems & tracks– November 1st 2018: Announcement of detailed problem setting and inputs– At least 2 weeks before IPEC deadline: Result communicated to participants– September 10-14 2019: Award ceremony at IPEC
![Page 95: Computational Experiments - PACE · 2020-05-11 · Computational Experiments Challenge Where it came from, how it went, who won, and what’s next August 22 nd, IPEC 2018, Helsinki,](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062603/5f05533e7e708231d41267d6/html5/thumbnails/95.jpg)
5
pacechallenge.wordpress.com