Discovering Quality-Diversity Algorithms via Meta-Black-Box Optimization
Maxence Faldor, Robert Tjarko Lange, Antoine Cully

TL;DR
This paper introduces a meta-learning approach to automatically discover new Quality-Diversity algorithms, outperforming traditional heuristics and generalizing well across various domains and dimensions.
Contribution
It proposes using attention-based neural architectures to parameterize and evolve novel Quality-Diversity algorithms, moving beyond heuristic-based methods.
Findings
Discovered algorithms outperform traditional baselines.
Algorithms generalize to higher dimensions and new domains.
Meta-learning naturally maintains diversity even when optimized for fitness.
Abstract
Quality-Diversity has emerged as a powerful family of evolutionary algorithms that generate diverse populations of high-performing solutions by implementing local competition principles inspired by biological evolution. While these algorithms successfully foster diversity and innovation, their specific mechanisms rely on heuristics, such as grid-based competition in MAP-Elites or nearest-neighbor competition in unstructured archives. In this work, we propose a fundamentally different approach: using meta-learning to automatically discover novel Quality-Diversity algorithms. By parameterizing the competition rules using attention-based neural architectures, we evolve new algorithms that capture complex relationships between individuals in the descriptor space. Our discovered algorithms demonstrate competitive or superior performance compared to established Quality-Diversity baselines…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2026
Meta-learning of evolutionary algorithms have been around for some time. The approach has been evaluated on a large number of problems, ranging from the classical BBOB benchmarks to robot controller tasks. The learned QD approach partly outperforms ME and DNS on the BBOB benchmarks.
The application of statistical methodology could have been better. For example, in table 4, it would be useful to see p-values from statistical tests, or some information about variance. There is no proper analysis of scalability. I would have liked to see how the performance scales with increasing problem dimension across all methods considered for some problems. There is a very limited ablation study. It would be particularly interesting to understand the impact of the transformer architectu
- the motivation of the meta-QD approach based on biological evolution principles is well-written and quite convincing - I could not find any typo
- some elements of the methods and some experimental results are unsufficiently clear (see below) - a few claims are unsupported (see below) - some figures have issues (see below) - relevant variants and ablations are missing (see below) - it would make sense to compare the approach with approaches which strive to learn a good descriptor space (e.g. AURORA and many others).
1. I find the idea of the paper quite novel among QD algorithms, even though it builds heavily on the single-objective evolutionary algorithms in Lange 2023b. It is certainly rare to see a QD paper that involves meta-learning. 2. I appreciate the analysis of the learned local competition strategies in Section 5.2, as they help to understand how the variants operate after meta-learning. 3. The paper is overall well-written and easy to follow. It also has good statistical rigor, per
The paper takes a rather narrow view of QD algorithms as only being based on genetic algorithms. This view is stated on line 126 in the background, and it is reflected in the choice of baselines --- MAP-Elites, NS, and DNS are all based on genetic algorithms. However, QD in recent years has been able to reach a large number of machine learning domains by growing far beyond its roots in pure genetic algorithms. For example, works like PGA-MAP-Elites and PPGA incorporate reinforcement learning (RL
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
