Memetic Computing

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 103–120 | Cite as

A decomposition-based chemical reaction optimization for multi-objective vehicle routing problem for simultaneous delivery and pickup with time windows

  • Hongye Li
  • Lei Wang
  • Xinghong Hei
  • Wei Li
  • Qiaoyong Jiang
Regular Research Paper

Abstract

A practical variant of the vehicle routing problem (VRP), with simultaneous delivery and pickup and time windows (VRPSDPTW) is a challenging combinatorial optimization problem that has five optimization objectives in transportation and distribution logistics. Chemical reaction optimization has been used to solve mono and multi-objective problems. However, almost all attempts to solve multi-objective problems have included continues problems less than four objectives. This paper studies discrete multi-objective VRPSDPTW using decomposition-based multi-objective optimization chemical reaction optimization. In the proposed algorithm, each decomposed sub-problem is represented by a chemical molecule. All of the molecules are divided into a few groups, with each molecule having several neighboring molecules. To balance the diversity and convergence, we designed operators of on-wall ineffective collision and inter-molecular ineffective collision for a local search, as well as operators of decomposition and synthesis to enhance global convergence. The proposed approach is compared with two different algorithms on hypervolume performance measures. Experimental results show that the proposed algorithm outperform the other algorithms in most benchmarks.

Keywords

Multi-objective optimization Chemical reaction optimization Decomposition Vehicle routing problem with simultaneous delivery and pickup and time windows 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would also like to thank Prof. J. Wang for providing the 45 MOVRPTW Instances, Prof. H. L. Liu for providing the source codes of TMOEA/D. This work is partially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. U1534208, 61272283, U1334211), Shaanxi Science and Technology Innovation Project (2015KTZDGY01-04).

References

  1. 1.
    Goldbarg MC, Asconavieta PH, Goldbarg EFG (2012) Memetic algorithm for the traveling car renter problem: an experimental investigation. Memet Comput 4(2):89–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Xu Y, Lim MH, Ong YS (2008) Automatic configuration of metaheuristic algorithms for complex combinatorial optimization problems. In: 2008 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence). IEEE, pp 2380–2387Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Földesi P, Botzheim J (2010) Modeling of loss aversion in solving fuzzy road transport traveling salesman problem using eugenic bacterial memetic algorithm. Memet Comput 2(4):259–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang C, Mu D, Zhao F et al (2015) A parallel simulated annealing method for the vehicle routing problem with simultaneous pickup–delivery and time windows. Comput Ind Eng 83:111–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cherkesly M, Desaulniers G, Laporte G (2015) A population-based metaheuristic for the pickup and delivery problem with time windows and LIFO loading. Comput Oper Res 62:23–35MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tan KC, Chew YH, Lee LH (2006) A hybrid multiobjective evolutionary algorithm for solving vehicle routing problem with time windows. Comput Optim Appl 34(1):115–151MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang J, Zhou Y, Wang Y et al (2016) Multiobjective vehicle routing problems with simultaneous delivery and pickup and time windows: formulation, instances, and algorithms IEEE Trans Cybern 46(3):582–594. doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2015.2409837
  8. 8.
    Hsu WH, Chiang TCA (2012) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithm with enhanced reproduction operators for the vehicle routing problem with time windows. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC). IEEE, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iqbal S, Kaykobad M, Rahman MS (2015) Solving the multi-objective vehicle routing problem with soft time windows with the help of bees. Swarm Evol Comput 24:50–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li H, Landa-Silva D (2011) An adaptive evolutionary multi-objective approach based on simulated annealing. Evol Comput 19(4):561–595Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang Q, Li H (2007) MOEA/D: a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 11(6):712–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gong M, Cai Q, Chen X et al (2014) Complex network clustering by multiobjective discrete particle swarm optimization based on decomposition. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 18(1):82–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Qi Y, Hou Z, Li H et al (2015) A decomposition based memetic algorithm for multi-objective vehicle routing problem with time windows. Comput Oper Res 62:61–77MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lam AYS, Li VOK (2012) Chemical reaction optimization: a tutorial. Memet Comput 4(1):3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xu J, Lam A, Li VOK (2011) Chemical reaction optimization for task scheduling in grid computing. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 22(10):1624–1631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Duan H, Gan L (2015) Orthogonal multiobjective chemical reaction optimization approach for the brushless DC motor design. IEEE Trans Magn 51(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bechikh S, Chaabani A, Said L (2015) An efficient chemical reaction optimization algorithm for multiobjective optimization. IEEE Trans Cybern 45(10):2051–2064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li H, Wang L, Hei X (2015) Decomposition-based chemical reaction optimization (CRO) and an extended CRO algorithms for multiobjective optimization. J Comput Sci. doi: 10.1016/j.jocs.2015.09.003
  19. 19.
    Ishibuchi H, Akedo N, Nojima Y (2015) Behavior of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms on many-objective knapsack problems. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 19(2):264–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Das I, Dennis JE (1998) Normal-boundary intersection: a new method for generating the Pareto surface in nonlinear multicriteria optimization problems. SIAM J Optim 8(3):631–657MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu HL, Gu F, Cheung Y (2010) T-MOEA/D: MOEA/D with objective transform in multi-objective problems. In: 2010 international conference of information science and management engineering (ISME), vol 2. IEEE, pp 282–285Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang X, Tian Y, Jin Y (2015) A knee point-driven evolutionary algorithm for many-objective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 19(6):761–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zitzler E, Multiobjective Thiele L (1999) Evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3(4):257–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wilcoxon F (1945) Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biom Bull 1(6):80–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hongye Li
    • 1
  • Lei Wang
    • 1
  • Xinghong Hei
    • 1
  • Wei Li
    • 1
  • Qiaoyong Jiang
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer Science and EngineeringXi’an University of TechnologyXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations