← 🕸️ Machine Learning & Neural Networks

🎯 Multi-Objective Tuning

Trials run: 0
Pareto front size: 0
Hypervolume: 0%
Non-dominance (Pareto optimality): A ≺ B ⇔ ∀i fᵢ(A) ≤ fᵢ(B) ∧ ∃j fⱼ(A) < fⱼ(B)
Drag — rotate · Scroll — zoom · Axes: size → / accuracy ↑ / speed ↗

🎯 Advanced Hyperparameter Concepts: Multi-Objective and Automated Tuning

An automated tuner searches a live hyperparameter space in 3D — every trial is plotted by accuracy, model size and training time, and the Pareto-optimal frontier of best trade-offs emerges as random search, Bayesian-style exploitation or evolutionary refinement run.

🔬 What It Demonstrates

Real hyperparameter tuning rarely optimizes just one number. This simulation plots every automated trial in a 3D objective space — model size, accuracy and training time — and highlights the Pareto-optimal frontier: the trials no other trial beats on every objective at once. Watch how the frontier expands and its shape changes as trials accumulate.

🎮 How to Use

Pick a search strategy (random search, Bayesian-style exploitation, or evolutionary mutation of the current frontier), adjust the trial rate, and toggle whether dominated trials and the frontier line are shown. Drag to orbit the objective-space cube and scroll to zoom.

💡 Did You Know?

Real AutoML systems such as Optuna and Google Vizier use exactly this idea — instead of chasing one metric, they maintain a Pareto front of configurations (e.g. accuracy vs. inference latency vs. model size) so an engineer can pick the trade-off that fits their deployment target after the search finishes, rather than before it starts.