Industrial Engineering and Management Systems

  • 제8권3호
  • /
  • Pages.171-180
  • /
  • 2009
  • /
  • 1598-7248(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-6473(eISSN)
대한산업공학회 (Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers)
권호 표지

A Looping Population Learning Algorithm for the Makespan/Resource Trade-offs Project Scheduling

  • Fang, Ying-Chieh (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Yuan-Ze University) ;
  • Chyu, Chiuh-Cheng (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Yuan-Ze University)
  • 투고 : 2009.03.25
  • 심사 : 2009.08.03
  • 발행 : 2009.09.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Population learning algorithm (PLA) is a population-based method that was inspired by the similarities to the phenomenon of social education process in which a diminishing number of individuals enter an increasing number of learning stages. The study aims to develop a framework that repeatedly applying the PLA to solve the discrete resource constrained project scheduling problem with two objectives: minimizing project makespan and renewable resource availability, which are two most common concerns of management when a project is being executed. The PLA looping framework will provide a number of near Pareto optimal schedules for the management to make a choice. Different improvement schemes and learning procedures are applied at different stages of the process. The process gradually becomes more and more sophisticated and time consuming as there are less and less individuals to be taught. An experiment with ProGen generated instances was conducted, and the results demonstrated that the looping framework using PLA outperforms those using genetic local search, particle swarm optimization with local search, scatter search, as well as biased sampling multi-pass algorithm, in terms of several performance measures of proximity. However, the diversity using spread metric does not reveal any significant difference between these five looping algorithms.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Alcaraz, J. and Maroto, C. (2001), A Robust Genetic Algorithm for Resource Allocation in Project Scheduling, Annals of Operations Research, 102, 83-109 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010949931021
  2. Blazewicz, J., Lenstra, J. K., and Rinooy Kan, A. H. G. (1983), Scheduling subject to resource constraints: Classification and complexity, Discrete Mathematics, 5, 11-24 https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-218X(83)90012-4
  3. Boctor, F. F. (1990), Some efficient multi-heuristic procedures for resource-constrained project scheduling, European Journal of Operational Research, 49, 3-13 https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90116-S
  4. Deb, K. (2001), Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithm, Wiley, Chichester, 328
  5. Deb, K. and Jain, S. (2002), Running performance metrics for evolutionary multiobjective optimization, Asia-Pacific Conference Simulated Evolution and Learning (SEAL 01), Singapore, 12-20
  6. Debels, D., Reyck, B. D., Leus, R., and Vanhoucke, M. (2006), A hybrid scatter search/electromagnetism meta-heuristic for project scheduling, European Journal of Operational Research, 169, 638-653 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.08.020
  7. Demeulemeester, E. L. and Herroelen, W. S. (2002), Project scheduling: A research handbook, Norwell, MA: Kluwer, 8
  8. Eberhart, R. C., Simpson, P., and Dobbins, R. (1996), Computational Intelligence PC Tools, Academic Press Professional, 212-226
  9. Erenguc, S. S. and Icmeli-Tukel, O. (1999), Integrating quality as a measure of performance in resourceconstrained project scheduling problems, edited by Jan Weglarz, Project Scheduling: Recent Models, Algorithms and Applications, Kluwer Academic Publishers, USA, 433-450
  10. Erenguc, S. S., Ahn, T., and Conway, D. G. (2001), The resource constrained project scheduling problem with multiple crashable modes: An exact solution method, Naval Research Logistics, 48, 107-127 https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6750(200103)48:2<107::AID-NAV1>3.0.CO;2-9
  11. Glover, F. (1977), Heuristics for integer programming using surrogate constraints, Decision Sciences, 8, 156-166 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1977.tb01074.x
  12. Glover, F. and Kochenberge, G. A. (2003), Handbook of Metaheuristics, editors, Kochenberge, Kluwer Academic Publishers
  13. Herroelen, W., Demeulemeester, E. and De Reyck, B. (1999), A classification scheme for project scheduling, edited by J. Weglarz, Project Scheduling: Recent Models, Algorithms and Applications, Academic Publishers, USA, 1-26
  14. Hsu, C. C. and Kim, D. S. (2005), A new heuristic for the multi-mode resource investment problem, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56, 406-413 https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601827
  15. Jedrzejowicz, P. (1999), Social learning algorithm as a tool for solving some different scheduling problems, Foundation of Computing and Decision Science, 24(2), 51-66
  16. Jedrzejowicz, P. and Ratajczak, E. (2006), Population learning algorithm for the resource-constrained project scheduling, Perspectives in Modern Project Scheduling, edited by J. J$\acute{o}$zefowska and J. Weglarz, Springer's International Series
  17. J$\acute{o}$zefowska, J., Mika, M., R$\acute{o}$zycki, R, Walig$\acute{o}$ra, G. and Weglarz, J. (1998), Local search metaheuristics for discrete-continuous schedulingproblems, European Journal of Operational Research, 107, 354-370 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00345-7
  18. Keskin, B. B. and Uster, H. (2007), A scatter searchbased heuristic to locate capacitated transhipment points, Computers and Operations Research, 34, 3112-3125 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2005.11.020
  19. Kennedy, J. and Eberhart, R. C. (1995), Particle swarm optimization, In Proceedings of the 1995 IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, Piscataway, New Jersey, IEEE Service Center, 1942-1948
  20. Kemmo$\acute{e}$ Tchomt$\acute{e}$, S. and Gourgand, M. (2009), Particle swarm optimization: A study of particle displacement for solving continuous and combinatorial optimization problems, International Journal of Production Economics, doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.03.015
  21. Klein, R. (2000), Bidirectional planning: improving priority rule-based heuristics for scheduling resourceconstrained projects, European Journal of Operational Research, 127, 619-638 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00347-1
  22. Kolisch, R. and Drexl, A. (1996), Serial and parallel resource-constrained project scheduling methods revisited: Theory and computation, European Journal of Operational Research, 90, 320-333 https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(95)00357-6
  23. Kolisch, R. and Hartmann, S. (2006), Experimental evaluation of state-of-the-art heuristics for the resource-constrained project scheduling: An update, European Journal of Operational Research, 174, 23-37 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.01.065
  24. Kolisch, R. and Sprecher, A. (1996), PSPLIB-A project scheduling problem library, European Journal of Operational Research, 96, 205-216 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(96)00170-1
  25. Li, K. Y. and Willis, R. J. (1992), An iterative scheduling technique for resource-constrained project scheduling, European Journal of Operational Research, 56, 370-379 https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(92)90320-9
  26. Marti, R., Laguna, M., and Glover, F. (2006), Principle of scatter search, European Journal of Operational Research, 169, 359-372 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.08.004
  27. Suganthan, P. N. (1999), Particle swarm optimizer with neighbourhood operator, in Proceedings of the Congress on Evolutionary Computation, (Washington DC, USA), IEEE Service Center, Piscataway, NJ, 1958-1961
  28. Tormos, P. and Lova, A. (2003), An efficient multi-pass heuristic for project scheduling with constrained resources, International Journal of Production Research, 41(5), 1071-1086 https://doi.org/10.1080/0020754021000033904
  29. Valls, V., Ballestin, F., and Quintanilla, S. (2005), Justification and RCPSP: A technique that pays, European Journal of Operational Research, 165, 375-386 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.008
  30. Van Veldhuizen, D. A. (1999), Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: classifications, analyses, and new Innovations, PhD thesis, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, Wri-ght-Patterson AFB, Ohio
  31. Vanhoucke, M., Demeulemeester, E., and Herroelen, W. (2002), Discrete time/cost trade-offs in project scheduling with time-switch constraints, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(7), 741-751 https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601351
  32. Waligora, G. (2008), Discrete-continuous project scheduling with discounted cash flow-A tabu search approach, Computers and Operations Research, 35, 2141-2153 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2006.09.022
  33. Yamashita, D. S., Armentano, V. A., and Laguna M. (2006), Scatter search for project scheduling with resource availability cost, European Journal of Operational Research, 169, 623-637 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.08.019
  34. Zitzler, E. and Thiele, L. (1999), Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength pareto approach, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 3(4), 257-271 https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.797969
  35. Zhang, H., Li, X., Li, H., and Hung, F. (2005), Particle swarm optimization-based schemes for resourceconstrained project scheduling, Automation in Construction, 14, 393-404 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2004.08.006