Needed: An Empirical Science of Algorithms

J. N. Hooker
Additional contact information
J. N. Hooker: Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Operations Research, 1994, vol. 42, issue 2, 201-212

Abstract: Deductive algorithmic science has reached a high level of sophistication, but its worst-case and average-case results seldom tell us how well an algorithm is actually going to work in practice. I argue that an empirical science of algorithms is a viable alternative. I respond to misgivings about an empirical approach, including the prevalent notion that only a deductive treatment can be “theoretical” or sophisticated. NP-completeness theory, for instance, is interesting partly because it has significant, if unacknowledged, empirical content. An empirical approach requires not only rigorous experimental design and analysis, but also the invention of empirically-based explanatory theories. I give some examples of recent work that partially achieves this aim.

Keywords: analysis; of; algorithms:; empirical; methods; for; analysis; of; algorithms (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1994
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (13)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.42.2.201 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:oropre:v:42:y:1994:i:2:p:201-212

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Operations Research from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().