Optimization of Logistics I 2 Typical Problems r20 PDF
Optimization of Logistics I 2 Typical Problems r20 PDF
Optimization of Logistics I 2 Typical Problems r20 PDF
net/publication/267755263
CITATION READS
1 213
1 author:
Turkay Yildiz
Izmir Institute of Technology
94 PUBLICATIONS 37 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Turkay Yildiz on 24 August 2015.
Objective function
n m
Minimize Z = C x
i 1 j 1
ij ij
Subject to
x
j 1
ij 1, i 1,..., n
a x
j 1
ij ij bj , j 1,..., n
n = number of tasks
m = number of servers
Cij = cost of assigning task i to server j
bj = units of resource available to server j
aij = units of resource required to perform task i by server j
and variables
The most recent and highly cited studies about the assignment problem are
shown in table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Studies in the literature about the assignment problem
A computational study of exact knapsack separation for the generalized assignment problem (Avella et
al. 2010).
Solving the class responsibility assignment problem in object-oriented analysis with multi-objective
genetic algorithms (Bowman et al. 2010).
The multi-unit assignment problem: theory and evidence from course allocation at harvard (Budish and
Cantillon 2012).
The wiener maximum quadratic assignment problem (cela et al. 2011).
An efficient solution algorithm for solving multi-class reliability-based traffic assignment problem
(Chen et al. 2011).
The storage location assignment problem for outbound containers in a maritime terminal (Chen and
Lu 2012).
An ant colony optimisation algorithm for solving the asymmetric traffic assignment problem
(D’acierno et al. 2012).
Exploiting group symmetry in semidefinite programming relaxations of the quadratic assignment
problem (de Klerk and Sotirov 2010).
State covariance assignment problem (Khaloozadeh and Baromand 2010).
A multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for the deployment and power assignment problem in
wireless sensor networks (Konstantinidis et al. 2010).
Reliability optimization of component assignment problem for a multistate network in terms of
minimal cuts (Lin and Yeh 2011).
Stability of user-equilibrium route flow solutions for the traffic assignment problem (Lu and Nie 2010).
Grasp with path-relinking for the generalized quadratic assignment problem (Mateus et al. 2011).
Multiobjective genetic algorithms for solving the impairment-aware routing and wavelength assignment
problem (Monoyios and Vlachos 2011).
A class of bush-based algorithms for the traffic assignment problem (Nie 2010).
A cell-based merchant-nemhauser model for the system optimum dynamic traffic assignment problem
(Nie 2011).
Solving the dynamic user optimal assignment problem considering queue spillback (Nie and Zhang
2010).
Bees algorithm for generalized assignment problem (Ozbakir et al. 2010).
A two phase method for multi-objective integer programming and its application to the assignment
problem with three objectives (Przybylski et al. 2010).
Partial eigenvalue assignment problem of high order control systems using orthogonality relations
(Ramadan and El-Sayed 2010).
A due-date assignment problem with learning effect and deteriorating jobs (Wang and Guo 2010).
Single-machine due-window assignment problem with learning effect and deteriorating jobs (Wang and
Wang 2011).
Effective formulation reductions for the quadratic assignment problem (Zhang et al. 2010).
Routing and wavelength assignment problem in pce-based wavelength-switched optical networks
(Zhao et al. 2010).
A novel global harmony search algorithm for task assignment problem (Zou et al. 2010).
Hungarian (Munkres) algorithm versus Jonker-Volgenant algorithm
16
Hungarian
14 Jonker-Volgenant
12
10
Time to complete (t)
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Dimension of the matrix (nxn)
The “knapsack” stems from the rather artificial application to try to fulfill a
hiker's knapsack at the total maximum value (Williams 2013) application.
Each item it considers taking with it has a certain value and a certain weight
(Williams 2013). Limiting overall weight is the single constraint (Williams
2013).
The knapsack problem takes a set of items, each with a weight and profit,
and tries to fit as many of these items in the knapsack to maximize profit
while not exceeding the maximum weight the knapsack may contain
(Rondeau and Bostian 2009).
m n
Maximize Z v j xij
i 1 j 1
Subject to
m
x
i 1
ij 1, j
n
w x
j 1
j ij Ci , j
The most recent and highly cited studies about the knapsack problem are
shown in table 2.2.
Table 2.2 Studies in the literature about the knapsack problem
Kernel search: a general heuristic for the multi-dimensional knapsack problem (Angelelli et al. 2010).
Identifying preferred solutions to multi-objective binary optimisation problems, with an application to
the multi-objective knapsack problem (Argyris et al. 2011).
A multi-level search strategy for the 0-1 multidimensional knapsack problem (Boussier et al. 2010).
A knapsack problem as a tool to solve the production planning problem in small foundries (Camargo
et al. 2012).
A column generation method for the multiple-choice multi-dimensional knapsack problem (Cherfi and
Hifi 2010).
A heuristic approach for allocation of data to rfıd tags: a data allocation knapsack problem (dakp)
(Davis et al. 2012).
Revenue maximization in the dynamic knapsack problem (Dizdar et al. 2011).
Development of core to solve the multidimensional multiple-choice knapsack problem (Ghasemi and
Razzazi 2011).
Sensor selection in distributed multiple-radar architectures for localization: a knapsack problem
formulation (Godrich et al. 2012).
A ptas for the chance-constrained knapsack problem with random item sizes (Goyal and Ravi 2010).
Improved convergent heuristics for the 0-1 multidimensional knapsack problem (Hanafi and Wilbaut
2011).
Problem reduction heuristic for the 0-1 multidimensional knapsack problem (Hill et al. 2012).
An ant colony optimization approach for the multidimensional knapsack problem (Ke et al. 2010).
Fully polynomial approximation schemes for a symmetric quadratic knapsack problem and its
scheduling applications (Kellerer and Strusevich 2010).
Upper bounds for the 0-1 stochastic knapsack problem and a b&b algorithm (Kosuch and Lisser
2010).
Assessing solution quality of biobjective 0-1 knapsack problem using evolutionary and heuristic
algorithms (Kumar and Singh 2010).
Reoptimization in lagrangian methods for the 0-1 quadratic knapsack problem (Letocart et al. 2012).
Interdicting nuclear material on cargo containers using knapsack problem models (Mclay et al. 2011).
The multidimensional knapsack problem: structure and algorithms (Puchinger et al. 2010).
Fusing ant colony optimization with lagrangian relaxation for the multiple-choice multidimensional
knapsack problem (Ren et al. 2012).
Dynamic programming based algorithms for the discounted {0-1} knapsack problem (Rong et al.
2012).
A two state reduction based dynamic programming algorithm for the bi-objective 0-1 knapsack
problem (Rong et al. 2011).
A cooperative local search-based algorithm for the multiple-scenario max-min knapsack problem (Sbihi
2010).
An effective hybrid eda-based algorithm for solving multidimensional knapsack problem (Wang 2012).
Solving 0-1 knapsack problem by a novel global harmony search algorithm (Zou et al. 2011).
2.3 Facility location problem
Facility location problems deal with the number, location, equipment and
size of new plants as well as the sale, removal or reduction of existing
facilities (Ghiani 2013). In the logistics business, the process of site
planning is to design the entire facility through which revenue from
suppliers to demand points, while in the public sector, it is to determine all
facilities from which users are served (Ghiani 2013).
The most recent and highly cited studies about the facility location problem
are shown in table 2.3.
Table 2.3 Studies in the literature about the facility location problem
A computational comparison of several formulations for the multi-period incremental service facility
location problem (Albareda-Sambola et al. 2010).
The facility location problem with bernoulli demands (Albareda-Sambola et al. 2011).
P-hub approach for the optimal park-and-ride facility location problem (Aros-Vera et al. 2013).
Semi-lagrangian relaxation applied to the uncapacitated facility location problem (Beltran-Royo et al.
2012).
Solving conflicting bi-objective facility location problem by nsga ii evolutionary algorithm
(Bhattacharya and Bandyopadhyay 2010).
An optimal bifactor approximation algorithm for the metric uncapacitated facility location problem
(Byrka and Aardal 2010).
A computational study of a nonlinear minsum facility location problem (Carrizosa et al. 2012).
Strategic closed-loop facility location problem with carbon market trading (Diabat et al. 2013).
A primal-dual approximation algorithm for the facility location problem with submodular penalties
(Du et al. 2012).
An approximation algorithm for the k-level capacitated facility location problem (Du et al. 2010).
A new approximation algorithm for the multilevel facility location problem (Gabor and van Ommeren
2010).
A generalized weiszfeld method for the multi-facility location problem (Iyigun and Ben-Israel 2010).
An approximation algorithm for the k-level stochastic facility location problem (Wang et al. 2010).
A cut-and-solve based algorithm for the single-source capacitated facility location problem (Yang et al.
2012).
2.4 Lot sizing problem
Once the levels of inventory are determined, the next step is to calculate in
what quantities the inventory will be replaced. This is called lot sizing. The
lot size is the amount of material to be ordered from a supplier or produced
internally to meet demand.
There are nine major types of lot-size methods, which fit into the following
two categories:
The most recent and highly cited studies about the lot-sizing problem are
shown in table 2.4.
Table 2.4 Studies in the literature about the lot sizing problem
Uncapacitated lot-sizing problem with production time windows, early productions, backlogs and lost
sales (Absi et al. 2011).
Adaptive genetic algorithm for lot-sizing problem with self-adjustment operation rate: a discussion
(Cardenas-Barron 2010).
A volume flexible economic production lot-sizing problem with imperfect quality and random machine
failure in fuzzy-stochastic environment (Das et al. 2011).
A particle swarm optimization for solving joint pricing and lot-sizing problem with fluctuating demand
and unit purchasing cost (Dye and Hsieh 2010).
A particle swarm optimization for solving joint pricing and lot-sizing problem with fluctuating demand
and trade credit financing (Dye and Ouyang 2011).
Solving single-product economic lot-sizing problem with non-increasing setup cost, constant capacity
and convex inventory cost in o(n log n) time (Feng et al. 2011).
A heuristic approach for a multi-product capacitated lot-sizing problem with pricing (Gonzalez-
Ramirez et al. 2011).
Stochastic lot-sizing problem with inventory-bounds and constant order-capacities (Guan and Liu
2010).
A robust lot sizing problem with ill-known demands (Guillaume et al. 2012).
A simulation metamodelling based neural networks for lot-sizing problem in mto sector (Hachicha
2011).
A fix-and-optimize approach for the multi-level capacitated lot sizing problem (Helber and Sahling
2010).
A robust block-chain based tabu search algorithm for the dynamic lot sizing problem with product
returns and remanufacturing (Li et al. 2014).
Integrating run-based preventive maintenance into the capacitated lot sizing problem with reliability
constraint (Lu et al. 2013).
A new algorithmic approach for capacitated lot-sizing problem in flow shops with sequence-dependent
setups (Mohammadi et al. 2010).
Grasp heuristic with path-relinking for the multi-plant capacitated lot sizing problem. (Nascimento et
al. 2010).
A simple fptas for a single-item capacitated economic lot-sizing problem with a monotone cost
structure (Ng et al. 2010).
An o(t-3) algorithm for the capacitated lot sizing problem with minimum order quantities (Okhrin and
Richter 2011).
The economic lot-sizing problem with remanufacturing and one-way substitution (Pineyro and Viera
2010).
Solving the stochastic dynamic lot-sizing problem through nature-inspired heuristics (Piperagkas et al.
2012).
A new silver-meal based heuristic for the single-item dynamic lot sizing problem with returns and
remanufacturing (Schulz 2011).
An efficient computational method for a stochastic dynamic lot-sizing problem under service-level
constraints (Tarim et al. 2011).
Stochastic dynamic lot-sizing problem using bi-level programming base on artificial intelligence
techniques (Wong et al. 2012).
An hnp-mp approach for the capacitated multi-item lot sizing problem with setup times (Wu et al.
2010).
An mip-based interval heuristic for the capacitated multi-level lot-sizing problem with setup times (Wu
et al. 2012).
A lagrangian relaxation based approach for the capacitated lot sizing problem in closed-loop supply
chain (Zhang et al. 2012).
2.5 Vehicle routing problems
Given the fluctuations and the upward trend in the price of oil,
transportation costs represent a share of more and more of the final cost
charged to the customer (about 10-20% of the overall cost of doing
business) it becomes essential to control these costs within global supply
chains (Jarboui et al. 2013). The class of problems that result from these
studies is commonly called the vehicle routing problem (VRP) (Jarboui et al.
2013). The classic problem of the development of vehicle routing is to
construct roads with minimal cost to a set of vehicles can visit a set of
customers geographically distributed exactly once (Jarboui et al. 2013).
Objective function is
G Z F
Minimize f obj C
i 1 j 1 k 1
x
ijk ijk
Subject to
G F
L x
i 1 k 1
k ijk D j j
Z F
L x
j 1 k 1
k ijk S j i
L x
j 1
k ijk U ki k , i
xijk 0i, j, k
and variables
xijk = the number of trips required by trailer k from location i to zone j
The vehicle routing problem is, in practice, the most important extension of
the traveling salesman problem where you have to schedule a number of
vehicles, limited capacity, around a number of clients (Williams 2013). Thus,
in addition to the sequence of customers to visit (the traveling salesman
problem) one need to decide which vehicles visiting which customers
(Williams 2013). Each customer has a known demand (assumed to be a
commodity, but it can easily be extended to more than one product)
(Williams 2013). Therefore, the limited capacities of vehicles need to be
taken into account.
Due to the simplicity of the VRP, variations of the VRP, built on the basic
VRP with additional features, proved more attractive to many researchers
(Pop 2012):
1. The Capacitated VRP, wherein each vehicle has a finite capacity
and each location has a finite demand.
2. The VRP with time windows, in which there is a specific
opportunity in which to visit each location time window.
3. VRP with multiple depots, which generalizes the idea of a depot, in
such a way that there are several depots from which each customer
can be served.
4. The multi-commodity VRP wherein each location has associated
demand for various commodities and each vehicle has a set of
compartments in a single product which can be loaded. The
problem then becomes one of deciding which products to place in
which compartments to minimize the distance traveled.
5. The general routing problem (GVRP) vehicles is the problem of
the design of delivery or collection of optimal routes, one given to
a number of nodes, predefined sets, mutually exclusive and
exhaustive node-sets (clusters) subject to capacity restrictions. The
GVRP can be seen as a particular kind of location-routing problem
(see, eg Laporte, Nagy and Salhi) for which several heuristic
algorithms, mostly exist.
The most recent and highly cited studies about the vehicle routing problem
are shown in table 2.5.
Table 2.5 Studies in the literature about the vehicle routing problem
An exact algorithm for a vehicle routing problem with time windows and multiple use of vehicles (Azi
et al. 2010).
Some applications of the generalized vehicle routing problem (Baldacci et al. 2010).
New route relaxation and pricing strategies for the vehicle routing problem (Baldacci et al. 2011).
Metaheuristics for the waste collection vehicle routing problem with time windows, driver rest period
and multiple disposal facilities (Benjamin and Beasley 2010).
A tabu search algorithm for the heterogeneous fixed fleet vehicle routing problem (Brandao 2011).
Iterated variable neighborhood descent algorithm for the capacitated vehicle routing problem (Chen et
al. 2010).
Branch-and-price-and-cut for the split-delivery vehicle routing problem with time windows
(Desaulniers 2010).
A multi-start evolutionary local search for the two-dimensional loading capacitated vehicle routing
problem (Duhamel et al. 2011).
An iterative route construction and improvement algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with soft
time windows (Figliozzi 2010).
An improved multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with time
windows (Garcia-najera and Bullinaria 2011).
Using simulated annealing to minimize fuel consumption for the time-dependent vehicle routing
problem (Kuo 2010).
Application of genetic algorithms to solve the multidepot vehicle routing problem (Lau et al. 2010).
An enhanced ant colony optimization (eaco) applied to capacitated vehicle routing problem (lee et al.
2010).
A hybrid genetic - particle swarm optimization algorithm for the vehicle routing problem (Marinakis
and Marinaki 2010).
A hybrid particle swarm optimization algorithm for the vehicle routing problem (Marinakis et al. 2010).
A memetic algorithm for the multi-compartment vehicle routing problem with stochastic demands
(Mendoza et al. 2010).
A penalty-based edge assembly memetic algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with time windows
(Nagata et al. 2010).
An effective memetic algorithm for the cumulative capacitated vehicle routing problem (Ngueveu et al.
2010).
The two-echelon capacitated vehicle routing problem: models and math-based heuristics (Perboli et al.
2011).
A hybrid evolution strategy for the open vehicle routing problem (Repoussis et al. 2010).
An adaptive large neighborhood search heuristic for the cumulative capacitated vehicle routing
problem (Ribeiro and Laporte 2012).
A parallel heuristic for the vehicle routing problem with simultaneous pickup and delivery
(Subramanian et al. 2010).
An artificial bee colony algorithm for the capacitated vehicle routing problem (Szeto et al. 2011).
An ant colony optimization model: the period vehicle routing problem with time windows (Yu and
Yang 2011).
A parallel improved ant colony optimization for multi-depot vehicle routing problem (Yu et al. 2011).
2.6 Scheduling problem
Objective function
n
Minimize Z = t j ( m ), j
j 1 19
Subject to
and variables:
Objective function
N
Minimize Z = C x
i 1
i i
Subject to
x
iM j
i Rj j
xi 0 i
and variables
The most recent and highly cited studies about the scheduling problem are
shown in table 2.6.
Table 2.6 Studies in the literature about the scheduling problem
A neurogenetic approach for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem (Agarwal et al.
2011).
An artificial immune algorithm for the flexible job-shop scheduling problem (Bagheri et al. 2010).
A two-agent single-machine scheduling problem with truncated sum-of-processing-times-based
learning considerations (Cheng et al. 2011).
An improved genetic algorithm for the distributed and flexible job-shop scheduling problem (de
Giovanni and Pezzella 2010).
New multi-objective method to solve reentrant hybrid flow shop scheduling problem (Dugardin et al.
2010).
A novel competitive co-evolutionary quantum genetic algorithm for stochastic job shop scheduling
problem (Gu et al. 2010).
A proactive approach for simultaneous berth and quay crane scheduling problem with stochastic arrival
and handling time (Han et al. 2010).
A survey of variants and extensions of the resource-constrained project scheduling problem (Hartmann
and Briskorn 2010).
A two-machine flowshop scheduling problem with deteriorating jobs and blocking (Lee et al. 2010).
A single-machine scheduling problem with two-agent and deteriorating jobs (Lee et al. 2010).
A single-machine learning effect scheduling problem with release times (Lee et al. 2010).
A hybrid tabu search algorithm with an efficient neighborhood structure for the flexible job shop
scheduling problem (Li et al. 2011).
A pareto approach to multi-objective flexible job-shop scheduling problem using particle swarm
optimization and local search (Moslehi and Mahnam 2011).
A local-best harmony search algorithm with dynamic sub-harmony memories for lot-streaming flow
shop scheduling problem (Pan et al. 2011).
A discrete artificial bee colony algorithm for the lot-streaming flow shop scheduling problem (Pan et al.
2011).
An iterated greedy algorithm for the flowshop scheduling problem with blocking (Ribas et al. 2011).
The hybrid flow shop scheduling problem (Ruiz and Vazquez-Rodriguez 2010).
Total flow time minimization in a flowshop sequence-dependent group scheduling problem (Salmasi et
al. 2010).
A genetic algorithm for the unrelated parallel machine scheduling problem with sequence dependent
setup times (Vallada and Ruiz 2011).
A genetic algorithm for the preemptive and non-preemptive multi-mode resource-constrained project
scheduling problem (van Peteghem and Vanhoucke 2010).
A multi-objective genetic algorithm based on immune and entropy principle for flexible job-shop
scheduling problem (Wang et al. 2010).
A multi-objective ant colony system algorithm for flow shop scheduling problem (Yagmahan and
Yenisey 2010).
An efficient ant colony system based on receding horizon control for the aircraft arrival sequencing
and scheduling problem (Zhan et al. 2010).
An effective genetic algorithm for the flexible job-shop scheduling problem (Zhang et al. 2011).
A hybrid immune simulated annealing algorithm for the job shop scheduling problem (Zhang and Wu
2010).
2.7 Shortest Path Problems
A shortest path in a graph defines the shortest possible edges that can be
traversed to reach a target node and minimize cost (Mastorakis 2011).
Shortest path problems can be classified into Single Source Shortest Path,
where the problem of finding a path between two vertices such that the
sum of the weights of its constituent edges is minimized (Mastorakis 2011).
Shortest path problem at one short time fraction with an intense terminal
traffic conditions and thus, dynamically assigned path nodes for dynamic
yard operations (nodes network) can be modeled by a graph G (V , E )
where it comprises a set of vertices or nodes V and a set of E of edges or
lines. A tour at the yard area within the dynamically assigned path nodes can
be represented via a permutation (1 , 2 ,..., n ) . The shortest distance
at yard area is formulated as,
Objective function is
Minimize Z =
( i , j )A
Cij xij
Subject to
x ji xij 1 if i s, 0 if i s or d i N , 1 if i d
j:( j ,i )A i:( i , j )A
xij 0 (i, j ) A
where
The most recent and highly cited studies about the shortest path problem
are shown in table 2.4.
Table 2.7 Studies in the literature about the shortest path problem
An evolutionary solution for multimodal shortest path problem in metropolises (Abbaspour and
Samadzadegan 2010).
An extended shortest path problem: a data envelopment analysis approach (Amirteimoori 2012).
An enhanced exact procedure for the absolute robust shortest path problem (Bruni and Guerriero
2010).
Bicriterion shortest path problem with a general nonadditive cost (Chen and Nie 2013).
Fuzzy dijkstra algorithm for shortest path problem under uncertain environment (Deng et al. 2012).
Tight analysis of the (1+1)-ea for the single source shortest path problem (Doerr et al. 2011).
Solving the fuzzy shortest path problem using multi-criteria decision method based on vague similarity
measure (Dou et al. 2012).
New models for the robust shortest path problem: complexity, resolution and generalization (Gabrel et
al. 2013).
Shortest path problem with uncertain arc lengths (Gao 2011).
An ant colony optimization algorithm for the bi-objective shortest path problem (Ghoseiri and Nadjari
2010).
Exploring the runtime of an evolutionary algorithm for the multi-objective shortest path problem
(Horoba 2010).
The shortest path problem on a fuzzy time-dependent network (Huang and Ding 2012).
An aggregate label setting policy for the multi-objective shortest path problem (Iori et al. 2010).
Solving the constrained shortest path problem using random search strategy (Li et al. 2010).
On an exact method for the constrained shortest path problem (Lozano and Medaglia 2013).
An efficient dynamic model for solving the shortest path problem (Nazemi and Omidi 2013).
On algorithms for the tricriteria shortest path problem with two bottleneck objective functions (Pinto
and Pascoal 2010).
A computational study of solution approaches for the resource constrained elementary shortest path
problem (Pugliese and Guerriero 2012).
Dynamic programming approaches to solve the shortest path problem with forbidden paths (Pugliese
and Guerriero 2013).
Shortest path problem with forbidden paths: the elementary version (Pugliese and Guerriero 2013).
A shortest path problem in an urban transportation network based on driver perceived travel time
(Ramazani et al. 2010).
K constrained shortest path problem (Shi 2010).
A simplified algorithm for the all pairs shortest path problem with o(n(2) log n) expected time
(Takaoka 2013).
A physarum polycephalum optimization algorithm for the bi-objective shortest path problem (Zhang
et al. 2014).
A novel algorithm for all pairs shortest path problem based on matrix multiplication and pulse coupled
neural network (Zhang et al. 2011).
2.7.1 Snapshot of an example solved by using Dijkstra’s
algorithm for the shortest path problem
150 46
Y
69
89 77
87 60 64
62
47 3 78
33 79
55 57 59
100 80 44 67
50
43 32
71 92 30
1581 39 16
70 97 35
50 27 94 31 38
37 53
8 9
5 6
45 42
0 2 90 4
68
13 100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
X
Figure 2.1 The Dijkstra’s algortihm’s solution for the shortest distance
from node 40 to node 97.
start id = 40
finish id = 97
distance = 262.5677
path = [40 61 11 93 69 78 32 97]
2.8 Travelling Salesman Problem
Objective function is
G Z F
Minimize f obj C
i 1 j 1 k 1
x
ijk ijk
Subject to
G F
L x
i 1 k 1
k ijk D j j
Z F
L x
j 1 k 1
k ijk S j i
Z
L x
j 1
k ijk U ki k , i
xijk 0i, j, k
and variables
xijk = the number of trips required by trailer k from location i to zone j
Objective function is
K
Minimize Z =
k 1 ( i , j )A
Cij xkij
Subject to
n
y
i 1
ij 1, j 2,3,..., n
n
y
j 1
ij 1, i 2,3,..., n
y
j 1
1j K
y
j 1
i1 K
n n
D x
i 1 j 2
j kij U, k 1, 2,..., K
x
k 1
kij yij i, j
( i , j )SxS
yij S 1, for all subsets S of 2,3,..., n
The vehicle fleet is homogeneous and that each vehicle has a capacity of U
units.
and variables:
The most recent and highly cited studies about the travelling salesman
problem are shown in table 2.8. Various example TSP problems with their
optimal solutions are depicted in Figures 2.2 through 2.8.
Table 2.8 Studies in the literature about the traveling salesman problem
Development a new mutation operator to solve the traveling salesman problem by aid of genetic
algorithms (Albayrak and Allahverdi 2011).
Amoeba-based neurocomputing for 8-city traveling salesman problem (Aono et al. 2011).
Estimation-based metaheuristics for the probabilistic traveling salesman problem (Balaprakash et al.
2010).
The traveling salesman problem with pickups, deliveries, and handling costs (Battarra et al. 2010).
A memetic algorithm with a large neighborhood crossover operator for the generalized traveling
salesman problem (Bontoux et al. 2010).
Experimental demonstration of a quantum annealing algorithm for the traveling salesman problem in a
nuclear-magnetic-resonance quantum simulator (Chen et al. 2011).
Parallelized genetic ant colony systems for solving the traveling salesman problem (Chen et al. 2011).
Solving the traveling salesman problem based on the genetic simulated annealing ant colony system
with particle swarm optimization techniques (Chen and Chien 2011).
Branch-and-cut for the pickup and delivery traveling salesman problem with fifo loading (Cordeau et
al. 2010).
A branch-and-cut algorithm for the pickup and delivery traveling salesman problem with lifo loading
(Cordeau et al. 2010).
The traveling salesman problem with pickup and delivery: polyhedral results and a branch-and-cut
algorithm (Dumitrescu et al. 2010).
An application of the self-organizing map in the non-euclidean traveling salesman problem (Faigl et al.
2011).
Eugenic bacterial memetic algorithm for fuzzy road transport traveling salesman problem (Foldesi et al.
2011).
Solving the traveling salesman problem based on an adaptive simulated annealing algorithm with
greedy search (Geng et al. 2011).
Verification and rectification of the physical analogy of simulated annealing for the solution of the
traveling salesman problem (Hasegawa 2011).
A concise guide to the traveling salesman problem (Laporte 2010).
Different initial solution generators in genetic algorithms for solving the probabilistic traveling
salesman problem (Liu 2010).
Two-phase pareto local search for the biobjective traveling salesman problem (Lust and Teghem 2010).
A hybrid multi-swarm particle swarm optimization algorithm for the probabilistic traveling salesman
problem (Marinakis and Marinaki 2010).
Honey bees mating optimization algorithm for the euclidean traveling salesman problem (Marinakis et
al. 2011).
Traveling salesman problem heuristics: leading methods, implementations and latest advances (Rego et
al. 2011).
An ensemble of discrete differential evolution algorithms for solving the generalized traveling salesman
problem (Tasgetiren et al. 2010).
Solving traveling salesman problem in the adleman-lipton model (Wang et al. 2012).
Chaotic ant swarm for the traveling salesman problem (Wei et al. 2011).
A parallel immune algorithm for traveling salesman problem and its application on cold rolling
scheduling (Zhao et al. 2011).
Locations Total Distance = 64.6901
10 10
9 9
8 8
7 7
6 6
5 5
Y
Y
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
X X
Solution History
200
150
Total Distance
100
50
0
0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10
Iteration
9 9
8 8
7 7
6 6
5 5
Y
Y
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
X X
Solution History
250
200
Total Distance
150
100
50
0
0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10
Iteration
9 9
8 8
7 7
6 6
5 5
Y
Y
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
X X
Solution History
250
200
Total Distance
150
100
50
0
0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10
Iteration
9 9
8 8
7 7
6 6
5 5
Y
Y
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
X X
Solution History
100
90
80
70
Total Distance
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10
Iteration
9 9
8 8
7 7
6 6
5 5
Y
Y
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
X X
Solution History
100
80
Total Distance
60
40
20
0
0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10
Iteration
8 8
7 7
6 6
5 5
Y
Y
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
X X
Solution History
100
80
Total Distance
60
40
20
0
0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10
Iteration
8 8
7 7
6 6
5 5
Y
Y
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
X
X
Solution History
100
90
80
70
Total Distance
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10
Iteration