“…When we look at the frequencies of the local search operators selected by AHEAD, we see that TabuCol is selected most often in comparison with PartialCol, which is no surprise, as TabuCol is already better on its own for a greater number of instances. However, when it comes to crossovers, we observe a balanced choice between the three GPX variants, with a bias toward the more conservative crossover GPX-9 for geometric graphs (e.g., DSJR500.5) and sparse graphs (e.g., wap instances), for which local optima are very distant in the search space, while the GPX crossover is more often preferred for random and dense graphs (e.g., DSJC1000.9), for which there is often larger backbones of solutions shared by the high-quality solutions (as shown in [10]).…”