Bayesian Optimization for Mixed-Variable Problems in the Natural Sciences
About
Optimizing expensive black-box objectives over mixed search spaces is a common challenge across the natural sciences. Bayesian optimization (BO) offers sample-efficient strategies through probabilistic surrogate models and acquisition functions. However, its effectiveness diminishes in mixed or high-cardinality discrete spaces, where gradients are unavailable and optimizing the acquisition function becomes computationally demanding. In this work, we generalize the probabilistic reparameterization (PR) approach of Daulton et al. to handle non-equidistant discrete variables, enabling gradient-based optimization in fully mixed-variable settings with Gaussian process (GP) surrogates. With real-world scientific optimization tasks in mind, we conduct systematic benchmarks on synthetic and experimental objectives to obtain an optimized kernel formulations and demonstrate the robustness of our generalized PR method. We additionally show that, when combined with a modified BO workflow, our approach can efficiently optimize highly discontinuous and discretized objective landscapes. This work establishes a practical BO framework for addressing fully mixed optimization problems in the natural sciences, and is particularly well suited to autonomous laboratory settings where noise, discretization, and limited data are inherent.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Black-box Optimization | Butternut Squash (BS) function variants strict tolerance | Mean Rank2.5 | 19 | |
| Black-box optimization ranking | BS function 20 variants loose tolerance | Mean Rank2.35 | 19 | |
| Composite score ranking | Butternut Squash function variants discrete domains medium tolerance | Mean Rank2.2 | 19 | |
| Function Optimization | Chemistry function medium tolerance level | Converged Runs6 | 9 | |
| Optimization | Chemistry function loose tolerance level | Converged Runs8 | 9 | |
| Function Optimization | Chemistry function strict tolerance level | Converged Runs5 | 9 | |
| Function Optimization | DUST2 function (strict tolerance) | Converged Runs8 | 6 | |
| Function Optimization | DUST1 strict tolerance | Converged Runs10 | 6 | |
| Function Optimization | DUST1 function loose tolerance | Composite Score0.051 | 6 | |
| Function Optimization | DUST2 loose tolerance level | Converged Runs9 | 6 |