Advertisement

Artificial immune system based approach for solving resource constraint project scheduling problem

  • Rina Agarwal
  • M. K. TiwariEmail author
  • S. K. Mukherjee
Original Article

Abstract

In this paper, resource-constrained project scheduling problem (RCPSP) is discussed with an objective of minimizing the makespan of a project. Due to its universality, it has a variety of applications as in manufacturing, production planning, project management and elsewhere. It is a well known computationally complex problem, thus warrants the application of heuristics techniques or AI based optimization tools to achieve optimal or near optimal solution in real time. In this research, the artificial immune system (AIS) approach is proposed to solve the aforementioned problem. It exploits the beauty of learning and memory acquisition to ensure the convergence with faster rate. During extensive computational experiment, it is found that the performance of the AIS algorithm on a well known data set of resource-constrained project scheduling problem is superior as compared to GA, fuzzy-GA, LFT, GRU, SIO, MINSLK, RSM, RAN, and MJP based approaches.

Keywords

Project scheduling Precedence constraint Resource constraint Artificial immune system Hypermutation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kim KW, Gen M, Yamajaki G (2003) Hybrid genetic algorithm with fuzzy logic for resource constrained project scheduling. Appl Soft Comput 2/3F:174–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davis EW (1966) Resource allocation in project network models - a survey. J Ind Eng 17:177–188Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Herroelen W, De Reyck B,Demeulemeester E (1998) Resource constrained project scheduling - a survey of recent developments. Comput Oper Res 25:279–302zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ozdamar L, Ulusoy G (1995) A survey on the resource-constrained project scheduling problem. IIE Trans 27:574–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boctor FF (1993) Heuristics for scheduling projects with resource restrictions and several resource-duration modes. Int J Prod Res 31:2547–2558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang YL, Matsuo H,Sullivan RS (1989) A bottleneck-based beam search for job scheduling in a flexible manufacturing system. Int J Prod Res 27:1949–1961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Demeulemeester EL, Herroelen WS (1996) Modelling setup times, process batches and transfer batches using activity network logic. Eur J OperRes 89:355–365zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Drexl A, Salewski F(1997) Distribution requirements and compactness constraints in school time tabling. Eur J Oper Res 102:193–214zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schrage L (1970) Solving resource-constrained network problems by implicit enumeration - Non preemptivecase. Oper Res 18:263–278zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sprecher A (1994) Resource-constrained project scheduling: exact methods for the multi-mode case. Number 409 in lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg NewYorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sprecher A (1999) A competitive exact algorithm for assembly line balancing. Int J Prod Res 37:1787–1816zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Reyck B, Herroelen WS (1995) Assembly line balancing by resource-constrained project scheduling- acritical appraisal. Technical Report 9505, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
    De Castero LN, Von ZubenFJ (2002) Learning and optimization using the clonal selection principle. IEEETrans Evolutionary computation, Special Issue on Artif Immune Syst 6(3):239–251Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khoo LP, Situmdrang TD(2003) Solving the assembly configuration problem for modular products using an immune algorithm approach. Int J Prod Res 41(15):3419–3434zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Anderson EJ, Ferris MC (1994) Genetic algorithm for combinatorial optimisation: assembly line balancing problem. ORSA J Comput 6:161–173zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    BaarT, Brucker P, Knust S (1999) Tabu-search algorithms and lower bounds for the resource constrained project scheduling problem. In: Voss et al. (eds.) Meta-heuristics, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pages 1–8Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bouleimen K, Lecocq H (1998) A new efficient simulated annealing algorithm for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem. Technical report, Universit´ e de Li` ege, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hartmann S (1998) A competitive genetic algorithm for resource-constrained project scheduling. NavRes Logist 45:733–750zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Leon VJ, Ramamoorthy B (1995) Strength and adaptability of problem-space based neighborhoods for resource-constrained scheduling. OR Spektrum 17:173–182zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kolisch R, Drexl A (1996) Adaptive search for solving hard project scheduling problems. Nav Res Logist 43:23–40zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kolisch R (1996) Serial and parallel resource-constrained project scheduling methods revisited: Theory and computation. Eur J Oper Res 90:320–333zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schirmer A (2000) Case-based reasoning and improved adaptive search for project scheduling. Nav Res Logist 47:201–222zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.B-II/8Birla Institute of TechnologyRanchiIndia
  2. 2.Department of ForgeTechnologyNational Institute of Foundry and ForgeTechnologyRanchiIndia
  3. 3.Vice-ChancellorBirla Institute of TechnologyRanchiIndia

Personalised recommendations