Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Case-based reasoning for repetitive combinatorial optimization problems, part I: Framework

Abstract

This article presents a case-based reasoning approach for the development of learning heuristics for solving repetitive operations research problems. We first define the subset of problems we will consider in this work: repetitive combinatorial optimization problems. We then present several general forms that can be used to select previously solved problems that might aid in the solution of the current problem, and several different techniques for actually using this information to derive a solution for the current problem. We describe both fixed forms and forms that have the ability to change as we solve more problems. A simple example for the 0–1 knapsack problem is presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. AshleyK.D. (1987). “Distinguishing: A Reasoner's Wedge.” In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 737–747). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  2. Bagley, J.D. (1967). “The Behavior of Adaptive Systems Which Employ Genetic and Correlation Algorithms,” Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.

  3. Bain, W.M. (1986). “Case-Based Reasoning: A Computer Model of Subjective Assessment.” Doctoral dissertation, Yale University.

  4. BertsimasD.J. (1988). “Probabilistic Combinatorial Optimization Problems.” Technical Report No. 194, Operations Research Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston.

  5. Bhargava, H.K., and S.O. Kimbrough. (1990). “On Embedded Language for Model Management.” In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Hawaii International Conferences on System Sciences (pp. 443–452).

  6. Bhargava, H.K., and R. Krishnan. (1990). “A Formal Approach for Model Formulation in a Model Management System.” In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Hawaii International Conferences on System Sciences (pp. 453–462).

  7. ChaturvediA. (1993). “Acquiring Implicit Knowledge in a Complex Domain.” Expert Systems with Applications, 6, 23–35.

  8. Collins, G.C. (1987). “Plan Creation: Using Strategies as Blueprints.” Doctoral disseration, Yale University.

  9. Davis, L. (1985a). “Applying Adaptive Algorithms to Epistatic Domains.” In Proceedings of the Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 162–164).

  10. Davis, L. (1985b). “Job Shop Scheduling with Genetic Algorithms.” In Proceedings of an International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications (pp. 136–140).

  11. De Jong, A.K. (1975). “An Analysis of the Behaviour of a Class of Genetic Adaptive Systems.” Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.

  12. DudzinskiK., and S.Walukiewicz (1987). “Exact Methods for the Knapsack Problem and Its Generalizations.” European Journal of Operational Research 28, 3–21.

  13. FourerR. (1983). “Modeling Languages Versus Matrix Generators for Linear Programming.” ACM Transactions Mathematical Software 9, 143–183.

  14. FriezeA.M., and M.R.B.Clarke. (1984). “Approximation Algorithms for the m-Dimensional 0–1 Knapsack Problem: Worst-Case and Probabilistic Analyses.” European Journal of Operational Research 15, 100–109.

  15. GloverF. (1986). “Future Paths for Integer Programming and Links to Artificial Intelligence.” Computers and Operations Research 13, 533–549.

  16. GloverF. (1989). “Tabu Search: Part I.” ORSA Journal on Computing 1, 190–206.

  17. GloverF. (1990). “Tabu Search: Part II.” ORSA Journal on Computing 2, 4–32.

  18. GloverF., D.Klingman, and N.Phillips. (1989). “A Network-Related Nuclear Power Plant Model with an Intelligent Branch-and-Bound Solution Approach.” Annals of Operations Research 21, 317–331.

  19. GloverF., and M.Laguna. (1991). “Target Analysis to Improve a Tabu Search Method for Machine Scheduling.” Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering 16, 239–253.

  20. GoldbergD.E. (1989). Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

  21. Goldberg, D.E., and R. Lingle. (1985). “Alleles, Loci, and the Traveling Salesman Problem.” In Proceedings of an International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications (pp. 154–159).

  22. Goldberg, D.E., and R.E. Smith. (1986). “AI Meets OR: Blind Inferential Search with Genetic Algorithms.” Paper presented at the ORSA/TIMS Joint National Meeting, Miami.

  23. Grefenstette, J.J., et al. (1985). “Genetic Algorithms for the Traveling Salesman Problem.” In Proceedings of an International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications (pp. 112–120).

  24. Grefenstette, J.J., and J.M. Fitzpatrick. (1985). “Genetic Search with Approximate Function Evaluations.” In Proceedings of an International Conference on Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications (pp. 112–120).

  25. HammondK.J. (1989). Case-Based Planning: Viewing Planning as a Memory Task. Perspectives in Artificial Intelligence. Boston: Academic Press.

  26. HollandJ.H. (1975). Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

  27. Koton, P. (1989). “SMARTPLAN: A Case-Based Resource Allocation and Scheduling System.” Proceedings of a Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning (pp. 285–289).

  28. Kraay, D. (1993). “Learning Heuristics for Repetitive Combinatorial Optimization Problems: With an Application in Train Scheduling.” Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

  29. Kraay, D., and P.T. Harker. (Forthcoming). “Case-Based Reasoning for Repetitive Combinatorial Optimization Problems: Part II: Numerical.” Heuristics.

  30. McClellandJ.L., and D.E.Rumelhart. (1987). Explorations in Parallel Distributed Processing: A Handbook of Models, Programs, and Exercises. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  31. NemhauserG.L., and L.A.Wolsey. (1988). Integer and Combinatorial Optimization. New York: Wiley.

  32. NygardK.E., P.Juell, and N.Kadaba. (1990). “Neural Networks for Selecting Vehicle Routing Heuristics.” ORSA Journal on Computing 2, 353–364.

  33. QuinlanJ.R. (1986). “Induction of Decision Trees.” In R.S.Michalski, J.G.Carbonell, and T.Mitchell (Eds.), Machine Learning (1, pp. 81–106). Palo Alto: Tioga.

  34. RiesbeckC., and R.Schank. (1989). Inside Case-Based Reasoning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

  35. RisslandE.L., and K.D.Ashley (1986). “Hypotheticals as Heuristic Device.” In Proceedings of AAAI-86 (American Association for Artificial Intelligence). Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

  36. RumelhartD.E., and J.L.McClelland (Eds.). (1986). Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  37. ShavlikJ.W., and T.G.Dietterich (Eds.). (1990). Readings in Machine Learning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

  38. ThagardP. (1989). “Explanatory Coherence.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12, 435–502.

  39. WatermanD.A.. (1986). A Guide to Expert Systems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

  40. Wetzel, A. (n.d.). “Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Genetic Algorithms in Combinatorial Optimization.” Unpublished manuscript, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.

Download references

Author information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kraay, D.R., Harker, P.T. Case-based reasoning for repetitive combinatorial optimization problems, part I: Framework. J Heuristics 2, 55–85 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00226293

Download citation

Key Words

  • artificial intelligence
  • combinatorial optimization