Advertisement

Multi-Objective Hyper-Heuristic Approaches for Space Allocation and Timetabling

  • Edmund K. Burke
  • J. Dario Landa Silva
  • Eric Soubeiga
Part of the Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series book series (ORCS, volume 32)

Abstract

An important issue in multi-objective optimisation is how to ensure that the obtained non-dominated set covers the Pareto front as widely as possible. A number of techniques (e.g. weight vectors, niching, clustering, cellular structures, etc.) have been proposed in the literature for this purpose. In this paper we propose a new approach to address this issue in multi-objective combinatorial optimisation. We explore hyper-heuristics, a research area which has gained increasing interest in recent years. A hyper-heuristic can be thought of as a heuristic method which iteratively attempts to select a good heuristic amongst many. The aim of using a hyper-heuristic is to raise the level of generality so as to be able to apply the same solution method to several problems, perhaps at the expense of reduced but still acceptable solution quality when compared to a tailor-made approach. The key is not to solve the problem directly but rather to (iteratively) recommend a suitable heuristic chosen because of its performance. In this paper we investigate a tabu search hyper-heuristic technique. The idea of our multi-objective hyper-heuristic approach is to choose, at each iteration during the search, the heuristic that is suitable for the optimisation of a given individual objective. We test the resulting approach on two very different real-world combinatorial optimisation problems: space allocation and timetabling. The results obtained show that the multi-objective hyper-heuristic approach can be successfully developed for these two problems producing solutions of acceptable quality.

Keywords

Multi-objective optimisation Pareto optimisation hyper-heuristic local search diversity preservation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ayob M., Kendall G. (2004). A Monte Carlo Hyper-Heuristic To Optimise Component Placement Sequencing for Multi Head Placement Machine. Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Intelligent Technologies (InTech 2003), pp. 132–141, Chiang Mai Thailand.Google Scholar
  2. Burke E.K., Jackson K., Kingston J.H., Weare R. (1997). Automated University Timetabling: the State of the Art. The Computer Journal, Vol. 40, No. 9, pp. 565–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burke E.K., Kendall G., Newall J., Hart E., Ross P., Schulemburg S. (2003). Hyper-heuristics: an Emerging Direction in Modern Search Technology. In: Glover F.W., Kochenberger G.A. (eds.), Handbook of Metaheuristics, Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Burke E.K., Kendall G., Soubeiga E. (2003b). A Tabu-search Hyper-heuristic for Timetabling and Rostering. Journal of Heuristics, Vol. 9, pp. 451–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burke E.K., Landa Silva J.D. (2002). Improving the Performance of Mul tiobjective Optimisers by Using Relaxed Dominance. Proceedings of the 4th Asia-Pacific Conference on Simulated Evolution and Learning (SEAL 2002), Singapore, pp. 203–207.Google Scholar
  6. Burke E.K., Landa Silva J.D. (2005). The Influence of the Fitness Evaluation Method on the Performance of Multiobjective Optimisers. To appear in European Journal of Operational Research.Google Scholar
  7. Burke E.K., Newall J. (2004). Solving Examination Timetabling Problems Through Adaptation of Heuristic Orderings. Annals of operations Research, Vol. 129, pp. 107–134.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Burke E.K., Varley D.B. (1998). Space Allocation: An Analysis of Higher Education Requirements. The Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling II: Selected Papers from the 2nd International Conference on the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 97), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Vol. 1408, pp. 20–33.Google Scholar
  9. Carter M.W., Laporte G. (1998). Recent Developments in Practical Course Timetabling. The Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling II: Selected Papers from the 2nd International Conference on the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 97), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1408, Springer, pp. 3–19.Google Scholar
  10. Coello Coello C.A., Van Veldhuizen D.A., Lamont G.B. (2002). Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems, Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Cowling P., Kendall G., Han L. (2002). An Investigation of a Hyperheuristic Genetic Algorithm Applied to a Trainer Scheduling Problem. Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2002), pp. 1185–1190.Google Scholar
  12. Cowling P., Kendall G., Soubeiga E. (2000). A Hyperheuristic Approach to Scheduling a Sales Summit. The Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling III: Selected Papers from the 3rd International Conference on the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling PATAT 2000, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2079, Springer, pp. 176–190.Google Scholar
  13. Cowling P., Kendall G., Soubeiga E. (2001). Hyperheuristics: A Tool for Rapid Prototyping in Scheduling and Optimisation. Second European Conference on Evolutionary Computing for Combinatorial Optimisation (EvoCop 2002), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2037, Springer, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  14. Cowling P., Kendall G., Soubeiga E. (2002b). Hyperheuristics: A Robust Optimisation Method Applied to Nurse Scheduling. Proceedings of the VII Parallel Problem Solving From Nature (PPSN VII), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2439, Springer, pp. 7–11.Google Scholar
  15. Czyzak P., Jaszkiewicz A. (1998) Pareto Simulated Annealing — A Metaheuristic for Multiple-objective Combinatorial Optimization. Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 34–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Deb K. (2001). Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms, Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. Deb K., Manikanth M., Mishra S. (2003). Towards a Quick Computation of Well-Spread Pareto Optimal Solutions. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2003), Faro Portugal, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2632, Springer, pp. 222–236.Google Scholar
  18. Farina M., Amato P. (2003). Fuzzy Optimality and Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2003), Faro Portugal, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2632, Springer, pp. 58–72.Google Scholar
  19. Gaw A., Rattadilok P., Kwan R.S.K. (2004). Distributed Choice Function Hyper-Heuristics for Timetabling and Scheduling. Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference on the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2004), Pittsburgh USA, pp. 495–497.Google Scholar
  20. Glover F., Laguna M. (1997). Tabu Search. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Goldberg, D. (1989). Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimisation and Machine Learning. Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  22. Gunawan S., Farhang A., Azarm 5. (2003). Multi-level Multi-objective Genetic Algorithm Using Entropy to Preserve Diversity. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2003), Faro Portugal, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2632, Springer, pp. 148–161.Google Scholar
  23. Han L., Kendall G. (2003). Investigation of a Tabu Assisted Hyper-Heuristic Genetic Algorithm. Proceedings of the 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC2003), Canberra Australia, pp. 2230–2237, IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  24. Hansen P., Mladenovic N. (2001). Variable Neighbourhood Search: Principles and Applications. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 130, No. 3, pp. 449–467.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. Hart E., Ross P. (1998). A Heuristic Combination Method for Solving Job-shop Scheduling Problems, Proceedings of the V Parallel Problem Solving From Nature (PPSN V), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1498, Springer, pp. 845–854.Google Scholar
  26. Horn J. (2003). Niche Distributions on the Pareto Optimal Front, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2003), Faro Portugal, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2632, Springer, pp. 365–375.Google Scholar
  27. Ishibuchi H., Yoshida T., Murata T. (2002). Selection of Initial Solutions for Local Search in Multiobjective Genetic Local Search. Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2002), Hawaii USA, pp. 950–955.Google Scholar
  28. Ishibuchi H., Shibata Y. (2003). An Empirical Study on the Effect of Mating Restriction on the Search Ability of EMO Algorithms. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2003), Faro Portugal, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2632, Springer, pp. 433–447.Google Scholar
  29. Jin H., Wong M.L. (2003). Adaptive Diversity Maintenance and Convergence Guarantee in Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms. Proceedings of the 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2003), Camberra Australia, IEEE Press, pp. 2498–2505.Google Scholar
  30. Jones D.F., Mirrazavi S.K., Tamiz M. (2001). Multiobjective Metaheuristics: An Overview of the Current State-of-the-Art. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 137, No. 1, pp. 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaelbling L.P., Littman M.L., Moore A.W. (1996). Reinforcement Learning: A Survey, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, Vol. 4, pp. 237–285.Google Scholar
  32. Knowles J., Corne D.C. (2000). Approximating the Nondominated Front Using the Pareto Archived Evolution Strategy, Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 149–172.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Kokolo I., Hajime K., Shigenobu K., Failure of Pareto-based MOEAS, Does Non-dominated Really Mean Near to Optimal?, Proceedings of the 2001 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2001), pp. 957–962, 2001.Google Scholar
  34. Kumar R., Rockett P. (2002). Improved Sampling of the Pareto-front in Multiobjective Genetic Optimization by Steady-state Evolution: A Pareto Converging Genetic Algorithm, Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 283–314.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Landa Silva J.D. (2003). Metaheuristic and Multiobjective Approaches for Space Allocation. PhD Thesis, School of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Nottingham.Google Scholar
  36. Laumams M., Thiele L., Deb K., Zitzler E. (2002). Combining Convergence and Diversity in Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization. Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 263–282.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Laumanns M., Zitzler E., Thiele L. (2001). On the Effects of Archiving, Elitism, and Density Based Selection in Multi-objective Optimization. Proceedings of the lst International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2001), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1993, Springer, pp. 181–196.Google Scholar
  38. Lu H., Yen G.G. (2002). Rank-density Based Multiobjective Genetic Algorithm. Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2002), Hawaii USA, IEEE Press, PP. 944–949.Google Scholar
  39. Martello S., Toth P. (1990). Knapsack Problems — Algorithms and Computer Implementations.Wiley.Google Scholar
  40. Mostaghim S., Teich J. (2003). The Role of e-dominance in Multi-objective Particle Swarm Optimization Methods. Proceedings of the 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2003), Camberra Australia, IEEE Press, PP. 1764–1771.Google Scholar
  41. Murata T., Ishibuchi H., Gen M. (2001). Specification of Genetic Search Directions in Cellular Multi-objective Genetic Algorithms. Proceedings of the lst International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2001), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1993, Springer, pp. 82–95.Google Scholar
  42. Rosenthal R.E. (1985). Principles of Multiobjective Optimization. Decision Sciences, Vol. 16, pp. 133–152.Google Scholar
  43. Ross P., Marin-Blazquez J.G., Schulenburg S., Hart E. (2003). Learning a Procedure that Can Solve Hard Bin-packing Problems: A New GA-based Approach to Hyper-heuristics. Proceedings of the 2003 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO 2003), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2724, Springer, pp. 1295–1306.Google Scholar
  44. Ross P., Schulenburg S., Marin-Blazquez J.G., Hart E. (2002). Hyper-heuristics: Learning to Combine Simplke Heuristics in Bin-packing Problems. Proceedings of the 2002 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO 2002), Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 942–948.Google Scholar
  45. Rossi-Doria O., Sampels M., Birattari M., Chiarandini M., Dorigo M., Gambardella L.M., Knowles J., Manfrin M., Mastrolilli M., Paechter B., Paquete L., St·zle T. (2003). A Comparion of the Performance of Different Metaheuristics on the Timetabling Problem, The Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling IV: Selected Papers from the 4th International Conference on the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2002), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2740, Springer, pp. 330–352.Google Scholar
  46. Salman F.S., Kalagnaman J.R., Murthy S., Davenport A. n(2002). Cooperative Strategies for Solving Bicriteria Sparse Multiple Knapsack Problem, Journal of Heuristics, Vol. 8, pp. 215–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schaerf A. (1999). A Survey of Automated Timetabling. Artificial Intelligence Review, Vol. 13, pp. 87–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Socha K., Knowles J., Samples M. (2002). A Max-Min Ant System for the University Course Timetabling Problem. Ant Algorithms: Proceedings of the Third International Workshop (ANTS 2002), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2463, Springer, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
  49. Socha K., Kisiel-Dorohinicki M. (2002). Agent-based Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization. Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2002), Hawaii USA, IEEE Press, PP. 109–114.Google Scholar
  50. Soubeiga E. (2003). Development and Application of Hyperheuristics to Personnel Scheduling, PhD Thesis, School of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Nottingham, June 2003.Google Scholar
  51. Steuer Ralph E. (1986). Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation and Application. Wiley.Google Scholar
  52. Sutton R.S., Barto A.G. (1998). Reinforcement Learning, MIT Press.Google Scholar
  53. Talbi E.G., Rahoudal M., Mabed M.H., Dhaenens C. (2001). A Hybrid Evolutionary Approach for Multicriteria Optimization Problems: Application to the Flow Shop. Proceedings of the lst International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-criterion Optimization (EMO 2001), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1993, Zurich Switzerland, Springer, pp. 416–428.Google Scholar
  54. Toscano Pulido G., Coello Coello C.A. (2003). The Micro Genetic Algorithm 2: Towards Online Adaptation in Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2003), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2632, Springer, pp. 252–266.Google Scholar
  55. Ulungu E.L., Teghem J. Fortemps P.H., Tuyttens D. (1999). MOSA Method: A Tool for Solving Multiobjective Combinatorial Optimization Problems. Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis, Vol. 8, pp. 221–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zhu Z.Y., Leung K.S. (2002). Asynchronous Self-adjustable Island Genetic Algorithm for Multi-objective Optimization Problems. Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2002), Hawaii USA, IEEE Press, pp. 837–842.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edmund K. Burke
    • 1
  • J. Dario Landa Silva
    • 1
  • Eric Soubeiga
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer Science and Information TechnologyUniversity of NottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations