Abstract
Potential users of evolutionary algorithms (EAs) are often deterred by the ‘black box’ nature of many of the available examples. Typically an evolutionary algorithm is designed to search a problem’s solution space directly, and the user simply waits for some stopping criterion to take effect. However, the user usually gets no guarantees about the quality of the fittest solution at that point. It is unsurprising, therefore, that users may choose to use some simpler, cheaper heuristic method whose performance is better understood and faster even though it may well deliver poorer results. Commercial users in particular often have good reason to be nervous about using EAs in situations in which their business is likely to be judged on the quality of the EA’s result. However, there are ways in which they can still use EAs to very good effect. This paper discusses one such way, namely using an EA to choose which heuristics to apply at each stage in some sequential decision process. If the available heuristics are individually acceptable, then a combination of them is going to produce a better quality result than any of them individually would. This can be guaranteed by the simple device of seeding the initial population with chromosomes that employ just one heuristic throughout. The paper describes some examples of this approach and discusses possible developments of the idea.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ausiello, G., Crescenzi, P., Gambosi, G., Kahn, V., Marchetti-Spaccamela, A., and Protasi, M. (1999). Complexity and Approximation: Combinatorial Optimisation Problems And Their Approximability Properties. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Brelaz, D. (1979). New methods to colour the vertices of a graph. Communications of the ACM, 22.
Bruns, R. (1993). Direct chromosome representation and advanced genetic algorithms for production scheduling. In Forrest, S., editor, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann, 352.
Bruns, R. (1997). Scheduling. In Bäck, T., Fogel, D., and Michalewicz, Z., editors, Handbook of Evolutionary Computation, release 97/1, chapter Part F: Applications of Evolutionary Computing, pages Fl.5:1-9. IOP Publishing Ltd and Oxford University Press.
Burke, E. and Ross, P. (1996). Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1153. Springer, Berlin. First International Conference, Aug–Sep 1995.
Carter, M. (1998). Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin. Second International Conference, Aug 1997.
Carter, M. W., Laporte, C., and Lee, S. Y. (1995). Examination timetabling: Algorithmic strategies and applications. Working Paper 94-03, University of Toronto Dept of Industrial Engineering.
Coffman, E., Garey, M., and D.S. Johnson (1997). Approximation algorithms for bin-packing — a survey. In Hochbaum, D., editor, Approximation Algorithms for NP-hard Problems, PWS, Boston, 46–93.
Culberson, J. C. (1992). Iterated greedy graph coloring and the difficulty landscape. Technical Report TR 92-07, Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6G 2H1. ftp ftp.cs.ualberta.ca pub/TechReports.
Dorndorf, U. and Pesch, E. (1995). Evolution based learning in a job shop scheduling environment. Computers and Operations Research, 22(1):25–40.
Hart, E. and Ross, P. (1998). A heuristic combination method for solving jobshop scheduling problems. In A.E. Eiben, T. Back, M. Schoenauer, and H-P. schwefel, editors, Parallel Problem Solving From Nature — PPSN V. Springer-Verlag.
Hart, E. and Ross, P. (2000). A systematic investigation of ga performance on job shop scheduling problems. In et. al., S. C., editor, Real-World Applications of Evolutionary Computing. Springer-Verlag.
Fang, H.-L. (1994). Genetic Algorithms in Timetabling and Scheduling. PhD thesis, Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh.
Fang, H.-L., Ross, P., and Corne, D. (1993). A promising genetic algorithm approach to job-shop scheduling, rescheduling, and open-shop scheduling problems. In Forrest, S., editor, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann, 375–382.
Hoffman, P. (1998). The Man Who Loved Only Numbers. Fourth Estate, London.
Johnson, D. (1972). Near-optimal bin packing algorithms. Technical Report TR-109, MIT Computing Laboratory, Cambridge, Mass.
Katz, J. and McCormick, D. (1997). Genetic algorithms and rule-based systems. Technical Analysis of Stocks and Commodities, pages 46–60.
Katz, J. and McCormick. D. (2000). The Encyclopaedia of Trading Strategies. Irwin Trader’s Edge. McGraw Hill, New York.
Lin, S.-C., Goodman, E., and Punch, W. (1997). A genetic algorithm approach to dynamic job-shop scheduling problems. In Back, T., editor, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan-Kaufmann, 481–489.
Minton, S., Johnston, M. D., Phillips, A. B., and Laird, P. (1992). Minimizing conflicts: a heuristic repair method for constraint satisifaction and scheduling problems. Artificial Intelligence, 58:161–205.
M. Vasquez and D. Whitley (2000). A comparison of genetic algorithms for the dynamic job-shop scheudling problem. In et. al., D., editor, Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference GECCO 2000. Morgan-Kaufmann.
Nakano, R. and Yamada, T. (1991). Conventional genetic algorithms for job shop problems. In Belew, R. and Booker, L., editors, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann, 474–479.
Norenkov, I. and Goodman, E. (1997). Solving scheduling problems via evolutionary methods for rule sequence optimization. Second World Conference on Soft Computing.
Petford, A. and Welsh, D. (1989). A randomised 3-colouring algorithm. Discrete Mathematics, 74:253–261.
Ross, P., Corne, D., and Hart, E. (1997). Some observations about GAbased exam timetabling. In Proceedings of the Second Conference on the Practice and Theory of A utomated Timetabling, Toronto, Canada.
Schaffer, J. and Eshelman, L. (1996). Combinatorial optimisation by genetic algorithms: the value of the genotype/phenotype distinction. In Goodman, E., Uskov, V., and Punch III, W., editors, EvCA96: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Evolutionary Computation and its Applications, Moscow. Institute for High-performance Computer Systems, Russian Academy of Sciences.
Terashima-Marin, H., Ross, P., and Valenzuela-Rendon, M. (1999). Evolution of constraint-satisfaction strategies in examination timetabling. In Banzhaf, W., Daida, J., Eiben, A., Garzon, M., Honavar, V., Jakiela, M., and Smith, R., editors, Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference: GECCO-99, San Mateo, CA. Morgan Kaufmann, 635–642.
Vaessens, R., Aarts, E., and Lenstra, J. (1996). Job shop scheduling by local search. INFORMS Journal of Computing, 8:302–317.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ross, P., Hart, E. (2003). Using Evolutionary Algorithms to Solve Problems by Combining Choices of Heuristics. In: Evolutionary Optimization. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 48. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48041-7_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48041-7_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-7654-5
Online ISBN: 978-0-306-48041-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive