Many questions in resource allocation can be formulated as matching problems, where nodes represent the agents/goods, and each node corresponding to an agent is endowed with a preference profile on the (sets of) its neighbors in the graph. Starting with the classical marriage setting by Gale and Shapley, we will investigate algorithmic and structural properties of these models, and discuss applications to the problem of allocating seats in public schools.

Many questions in resource allocation can be formulated as matching problems, where nodes represent the agents/goods, and each node corresponding to an agent is endowed with a preference profile on the (sets of) its neighbors in the graph. Starting with the classical marriage setting by Gale and Shapley, we will investigate algorithmic and structural properties of these models, and discuss applications to the problem of allocating seats in public schools.

In this mini-course, I present an overview of some recent advances in the theory of binary polynomial optimization together with specific applications in data science and machine learning. First utilizing a hypergraph representation scheme, I describe the connection between hypergraph acyclicity and the complexity of unconstrained binary polynomial optimization. As a byproduct, I present strong linear programming relaxations for general binary polynomial optimization problems and demonstrate their impact via extensive numerical experiments. Finally, I focus on two applications from data science, namely, Boolean tensor factorization and higher-order Markov random fields, and demonstrate how our theoretical findings enable us to obtain efficient algorithms with theoretical performance guarantees for these applications.

In this mini-course, I present an overview of some recent advances in the theory of binary polynomial optimization together with specific applications in data science and machine learning. First utilizing a hypergraph representation scheme, I describe the connection between hypergraph acyclicity and the complexity of unconstrained binary polynomial optimization. As a byproduct, I present strong linear programming relaxations for general binary polynomial optimization problems and demonstrate their impact via extensive numerical experiments. Finally, I focus on two applications from data science, namely, Boolean tensor factorization and higher-order Markov random fields, and demonstrate how our theoretical findings enable us to obtain efficient algorithms with theoretical performance guarantees for these applications.

The goal of network design is to construct cheap networks that satisfy certain connectivity requirements. A celebrated result by Jain [Combinatorica, 2001] provides a 2-approximation algorithm for a wide class of these problems. However, even for many very basic special cases nothing better is known. In this lecture series, we present an introduction and some of the new techniques underlying recent advances in this area. These techniques led for example to a new algorithm for the Steiner Tree Problem and to the first better-than-2 approximation algorithm for Weighted Connectivity Augmentation.

The goal of network design is to construct cheap networks that satisfy certain connectivity requirements. A celebrated result by Jain [Combinatorica, 2001] provides a 2-approximation algorithm for a wide class of these problems. However, even for many very basic special cases nothing better is known. In this lecture series, we present an introduction and some of the new techniques underlying recent advances in this area. These techniques led for example to a new algorithm for the Steiner Tree Problem and to the first better-than-2 approximation algorithm for Weighted Connectivity Augmentation.

If $X\subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$ is a finite set then every function on $X$ can be written as the restriction of a polynomial in n-variables. As a result, polynomial optimization on finite sets is literally the same as general (nonlinear) optimization on such sets. Thinking of functions as polynomials, however, provides us with plenty of additional structures which can be leveraged for constructing better (or at least different) optimization algorithms. In these lectures, we will overview some of the key problems and results coming from this algebraic point of view. Specifically, we will discuss: How to prove that a polynomial function is nonnegative on a finite set X? What kind of algebraic certificates (proofs) are available and what can we say about their size and complexity? If the set $X$ has symmetries, can we leverage them in some systematic way that is useful for optimization? Characterizing the affine linear functions that are nonnegative on $X$ gives a description of the polytope $P={\rm Conv}(X)$. Stratifying such functions by the degree of their nonnegativity certificates leads to (semidefinite) hierarchies of approximation for the polytope $P$ and it is natural to ask about their speed of convergence and its relationship with the combinatorics of $P$ Finally, if time permits we will discuss some recent ideas combining the above methods with reinforcement learning as a way to improve scalability for combinatorial optimization problems. The results in (1),(2), (3) above are due to Blekherman, Gouveia, Laurent, Nie, Parrilo, Saunderson, Thomas, and others. These lectures intend to be a self-contained introduction to this vibrant and exciting research area.

If $X\subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$ is a finite set then every function on $X$ can be written as the restriction of a polynomial in n-variables. As a result, polynomial optimization on finite sets is literally the same as general (nonlinear) optimization on such sets. Thinking of functions as polynomials, however, provides us with plenty of additional structures which can be leveraged for constructing better (or at least different) optimization algorithms. In these lectures, we will overview some of the key problems and results coming from this algebraic point of view. Specifically, we will discuss: How to prove that a polynomial function is nonnegative on a finite set X? What kind of algebraic certificates (proofs) are available and what can we say about their size and complexity? If the set $X$ has symmetries, can we leverage them in some systematic way that is useful for optimization? Characterizing the affine linear functions that are nonnegative on $X$ gives a description of the polytope $P={\rm Conv}(X)$. Stratifying such functions by the degree of their nonnegativity certificates leads to (semidefinite) hierarchies of approximation for the polytope $P$ and it is natural to ask about their speed of convergence and its relationship with the combinatorics of $P$ Finally, if time permits we will discuss some recent ideas combining the above methods with reinforcement learning as a way to improve scalability for combinatorial optimization problems. The results in (1),(2), (3) above are due to Blekherman, Gouveia, Laurent, Nie, Parrilo, Saunderson, Thomas, and others. These lectures intend to be a self-contained introduction to this vibrant and exciting research area.

Many questions in resource allocation can be formulated as matching problems, where nodes represent the agents/goods, and each node corresponding to an agent is endowed with a preference profile on the (sets of) its neighbors in the graph. Starting with the classical marriage setting by Gale and Shapley, we will investigate algorithmic and structural properties of these models, and discuss applications to the problem of allocating seats in public schools.

Many questions in resource allocation can be formulated as matching problems, where nodes represent the agents/goods, and each node corresponding to an agent is endowed with a preference profile on the (sets of) its neighbors in the graph. Starting with the classical marriage setting by Gale and Shapley, we will investigate algorithmic and structural properties of these models, and discuss applications to the problem of allocating seats in public schools.

The goal of network design is to construct cheap networks that satisfy certain connectivity requirements. A celebrated result by Jain [Combinatorica, 2001] provides a 2-approximation algorithm for a wide class of these problems. However, even for many very basic special cases nothing better is known. In this lecture series, we present an introduction and some of the new techniques underlying recent advances in this area. These techniques led for example to a new algorithm for the Steiner Tree Problem and to the first better-than-2 approximation algorithm for Weighted Connectivity Augmentation.

The goal of network design is to construct cheap networks that satisfy certain connectivity requirements. A celebrated result by Jain [Combinatorica, 2001] provides a 2-approximation algorithm for a wide class of these problems. However, even for many very basic special cases nothing better is known. In this lecture series, we present an introduction and some of the new techniques underlying recent advances in this area. These techniques led for example to a new algorithm for the Steiner Tree Problem and to the first better-than-2 approximation algorithm for Weighted Connectivity Augmentation.

In this mini-course, I present an overview of some recent advances in the theory of binary polynomial optimization together with specific applications in data science and machine learning. First utilizing a hypergraph representation scheme, I describe the connection between hypergraph acyclicity and the complexity of unconstrained binary polynomial optimization. As a byproduct, I present strong linear programming relaxations for general binary polynomial optimization problems and demonstrate their impact via extensive numerical experiments. Finally, I focus on two applications from data science, namely, Boolean tensor factorization and higher-order Markov random fields, and demonstrate how our theoretical findings enable us to obtain efficient algorithms with theoretical performance guarantees for these applications.

In this mini-course, I present an overview of some recent advances in the theory of binary polynomial optimization together with specific applications in data science and machine learning. First utilizing a hypergraph representation scheme, I describe the connection between hypergraph acyclicity and the complexity of unconstrained binary polynomial optimization. As a byproduct, I present strong linear programming relaxations for general binary polynomial optimization problems and demonstrate their impact via extensive numerical experiments. Finally, I focus on two applications from data science, namely, Boolean tensor factorization and higher-order Markov random fields, and demonstrate how our theoretical findings enable us to obtain efficient algorithms with theoretical performance guarantees for these applications.

If $X\subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$ is a finite set then every function on $X$ can be written as the restriction of a polynomial in n-variables. As a result, polynomial optimization on finite sets is literally the same as general (nonlinear) optimization on such sets. Thinking of functions as polynomials, however, provides us with plenty of additional structures which can be leveraged for constructing better (or at least different) optimization algorithms. In these lectures, we will overview some of the key problems and results coming from this algebraic point of view. Specifically, we will discuss: How to prove that a polynomial function is nonnegative on a finite set X? What kind of algebraic certificates (proofs) are available and what can we say about their size and complexity? If the set $X$ has symmetries, can we leverage them in some systematic way that is useful for optimization? Characterizing the affine linear functions that are nonnegative on $X$ gives a description of the polytope $P={\rm Conv}(X)$. Stratifying such functions by the degree of their nonnegativity certificates leads to (semidefinite) hierarchies of approximation for the polytope $P$ and it is natural to ask about their speed of convergence and its relationship with the combinatorics of $P$ Finally, if time permits we will discuss some recent ideas combining the above methods with reinforcement learning as a way to improve scalability for combinatorial optimization problems. The results in (1),(2), (3) above are due to Blekherman, Gouveia, Laurent, Nie, Parrilo, Saunderson, Thomas, and others. These lectures intend to be a self-contained introduction to this vibrant and exciting research area.

If $X\subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$ is a finite set then every function on $X$ can be written as the restriction of a polynomial in n-variables. As a result, polynomial optimization on finite sets is literally the same as general (nonlinear) optimization on such sets. Thinking of functions as polynomials, however, provides us with plenty of additional structures which can be leveraged for constructing better (or at least different) optimization algorithms. In these lectures, we will overview some of the key problems and results coming from this algebraic point of view. Specifically, we will discuss: How to prove that a polynomial function is nonnegative on a finite set X? What kind of algebraic certificates (proofs) are available and what can we say about their size and complexity? If the set $X$ has symmetries, can we leverage them in some systematic way that is useful for optimization? Characterizing the affine linear functions that are nonnegative on $X$ gives a description of the polytope $P={\rm Conv}(X)$. Stratifying such functions by the degree of their nonnegativity certificates leads to (semidefinite) hierarchies of approximation for the polytope $P$ and it is natural to ask about their speed of convergence and its relationship with the combinatorics of $P$ Finally, if time permits we will discuss some recent ideas combining the above methods with reinforcement learning as a way to improve scalability for combinatorial optimization problems. The results in (1),(2), (3) above are due to Blekherman, Gouveia, Laurent, Nie, Parrilo, Saunderson, Thomas, and others. These lectures intend to be a self-contained introduction to this vibrant and exciting research area.