4OR

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 43–66 | Cite as

A simulated annealing hyper-heuristic methodology for flexible decision support

  • Ruibin Bai
  • Jacek Blazewicz
  • Edmund K. Burke
  • Graham Kendall
  • Barry McCollum
Research Paper

Abstract

Most of the current search techniques represent approaches that are largely adapted for specific search problems. There are many real-world scenarios where the development of such bespoke systems is entirely appropriate. However, there are other situations where it would be beneficial to have methodologies which are generally applicable to more problems. One of our motivating goals for investigating hyper-heuristic methodologies is to provide a more general search framework that can be easily and automatically employed on a broader range of problems than is currently possible. In this paper, we investigate a simulated annealing hyper-heuristic methodology which operates on a search space of heuristics and which employs a stochastic heuristic selection strategy and a short-term memory. The generality and performance of the proposed algorithm is demonstrated over a large number of benchmark datasets drawn from two very different and difficult problems, namely; course timetabling and bin packing. The contribution of this paper is to present a method which can be readily (and automatically) applied to different problems whilst still being able to produce results on benchmark problems which are competitive with bespoke human designed tailor made algorithms for those problems.

Keywords

Hyper-heuristics Simulated annealing Bin packing Course timetabling 

MSC classification (2000)

90-08: Computational methods 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abdullah S, Burke EK, McCollum B (2007) Using a randomised iterative improvement algorithm with composite neighbourhood structures for the university course timetabling problem. In: Doerner KF, Gendreau M, Greistorfer P, Gutjahr G, Hartl RF, Reimann M (eds) Metaheuristics—progress in complex systems optimization. Springer, New York, pp 153–169Google Scholar
  2. Alvim ACF, Ribeiro CC, Glover F, Aloise DJ (2004) A hybrid improvement heuristic for the one-dimensional bin packing problem. J Heuristics 10: 205–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asmuni H, Burke EK, Garibaldi JM (2005) Fuzzy multiple heuristic ordering for course timetabling. In: Proceedings of the 5th United Kingdom workshop on computational intelligence (UKCI05), London, UK, pp 302–309Google Scholar
  4. Bai R, Kendall G (2005) An investigation of automated planograms using a simulated annealing based hyper-heuristic. In: Ibaraki T, Nonobe K, Yagiura M (eds) Metaheuristics: progress as real problem solver—(Operations research/computer science interface series, vol 32). Springer, New York, pp 87–108Google Scholar
  5. Belov G, Scheithauer G (2006) A branch-and-cut-and-price algorithm for one-dimensional stock cutting and two-dimensional two-stage cutting. Eur J Oper Res 171(1): 85–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burke EK, Kendall G (2005) Search methodologies: introductory tutorials in optimization and decision support techniques. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  7. Burke EK, Bykov Y, Newall J P, Petrovic S (2003a) A time-predefined approach to course timetabling. Yugosl J Oper Res 13(2): 139–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burke EK, Kendall G, Soubeiga E (2003b) A tabu-search hyperheuristic for timetabling and rostering. J Heuristics 9: 451–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burke EK, Petrovic S, Qu R (2006) Case based heuristic selection for timetabling problems. J Sched 9(2): 115–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burke EK, McCollum B, Meisels A, Petrovic S, Qu R (2007) A graph-based hyper-heuristic for timetabling problems. Eur J Oper Res 176(1): 177–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burke EK, Hyde M, Kendall G, Ochoa G, Ozcan E, Woodward JR (2009) A classification of hyper- heuristic approaches. In: Gendreau M, Potvin J-Y (eds) Handbook of metaheursistics. Springer, New York, pp 449–468Google Scholar
  12. Burke EK, Hyde M, Kendall G, Woodward JR (2010) A genetic programming hyper-heuristic approach for evolving 2-D strip packing heuristics. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 14(6): 942–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiarandini M, Birattari M, Socha K, Rossi-Doria O (2006) An effective hybrid algorithm for university course timetabling. J Sched 9(5): 403–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chiarandini M, Stutzle T (2003) A landscape analysis for a hybrid approximate algorithm on a timetabling problem. TU Darmstadt Technical Report, AIDA-03-05Google Scholar
  15. Conover WJ (1999) Practical nonparametric statistics, 3rd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Cowling P, Kendall G, Soubeiga E (2001) A hyperheuristic approach to scheduling a sales summit. In: Burke EK, Erben W (eds) Selected papers of the 3rd international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling, Lecture Notes in computer science series, vol 2079. Springer, pp 176–190Google Scholar
  17. Crowston WB, Glover F, Thompson GL, Trawick JD (1963) Probabilistic and parametric learning combinations of local job shop scheduling rules. ONR Research Memorandum, GSIA, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, p 117Google Scholar
  18. Dowsland KA, Soubeiga E, Burke EK (2006) A simulated annealing hyper-heuristic for determining shipper sizes. Eur J Oper Res 179(3): 759–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Falkenauer E (1996) A hybrid grouping genetic algorithm for bin packing. J Heuristics 2: 5–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Falkenauer E (1998) Genetic algorithms and grouping problems. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Fisher H, Thompson GL (1963) Probabilistic learning combinations of local job-shop scheduling rules. In: Muth JF, Thompson GL (eds) Industrial scheduling. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp 225–251Google Scholar
  22. Fleszar K, Hindi KS (2002) New heuristics for one-dimensional bin-packing. Comput Oper Res 29(7): 821–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Glover F, Kochenberger G (2003) Handbook of metaheuristics. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  24. Han L, Kendall G (2003) Guided operators for a hyper-heuristic genetic algorithm. In: AI 2003: advances in artificial intelligence: the proceedings of 16th Australian conference on AI. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2903. Springer, pp 807–820Google Scholar
  25. Hansen P, Mladenovic N, Moreno Perez JA (2008) Variable neighbourhood search: methods and applications. 4OR-A Q J Oper Res 6: 319–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hart E, Ross P, Nelson JA (1998) Solving a real-world problem using an evolving heuristically driven schedule builder. Evol Comput 6(1): 61–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kitano H (1990) Designing neural networks using genetic algorithms with graph generation system. Complex Syst 4: 461–476Google Scholar
  28. Kostuch P (2004) The university course timetabling problem with a 3-phase approach. In: Burke EK, Trick M (eds) The practice and theory of automated timetabling V, Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3616. Springer, Berlin, pp 109–125Google Scholar
  29. Lourenco HR, Martin OC, Stutzle T (2003) Iterated local search. In: Glover F, Kochenberger G (eds) Handbook of metaheuristics. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 321–354Google Scholar
  30. Lundy M, Mees A (1986) Convergence of an annealing algorithm. Math Program 34: 111–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Martello S, Toth P (1990) Knapsack problems: algorithms and computer implementations. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Martello S, Toth P (1990) Lower pounds and reduction procedures for the bin packing problem. Discret Appl Math 28: 59–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McMullan P (2007) An extended implementation of the Great Deluge Algorithm for course timetabling. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4487. Springer, Berlin, pp 538–545Google Scholar
  34. Metaheuristic Network (2003) International timetabling competition: Competition results http://www.idsia.ch/Files/ttcomp2002/results.htm. Accessed 11 October 2010
  35. Mockus J (1989) Bayesian approach to global optimization. Kluwer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mockus J (1994) Application of bayesian approach to numerical methods of global and stochastic optimization. J Glob Optim 4(4): 347–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mockus J (1997) Bayesian heuristic approach to discrete and global optimization. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  38. Mockus J (2000) A set of examples of global and discrete optimization: application of bayesian heuristic approach. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  39. Nareyek A (2003) Choosing search heuristics by non-stationary reinforcement learning. In: Resende MGC, de Sousa JP (eds) Metaheuristics: computer decision-making. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 523–544Google Scholar
  40. Qu R, Burke EK (2009) Hybridisations within a graph based hyper-heuristic framework for university timetabling problems. J Oper Res Soc 60: 1273–1285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rattadilok P, Gaw A, Kwan RSK (2005) Distributed choice function hyper-heuristics for timetabling and scheduling. In: Burke EK, Trick M (eds) Selected papers from the 5th international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling. Lecture notes in computer science series, vol 3616. Springer, Berlin, pp 51–70Google Scholar
  42. Ropke S, Pisinger D (2006) An adaptive large neighborhood search heuristic for the pickup and delivery problem with time windows. Transp Sci 40(4): 455–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ross P (2005) Hyper-heuristics. In: Burke EK, Kendall G (eds) Search methodologies: introductory tutorials in optimization and decision support techniques. Springer, Berlin, pp 529–556Google Scholar
  44. Ross P, Marin-Blazquez JG, Schulenburg S, Hart E (2003) Learning a procedure that can solve hard bin-packing problems: a new GA-based approach to hyper-heuristics. In: Proceeding of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference, GECCO 2003. Springer, Berlin, pp 1295–1306Google Scholar
  45. Rossi-Doria O, Blum C, Knowles J, Samples M, Socha K, Paechter B (2002) A local search for automated timetabling. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling [PATAT 2002] (pp 124–127)Google Scholar
  46. Runarsson TP, Yao X (2000) Stochastic ranking for constrained evolutionary optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 4(3): 344–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Scholl A, Klein R, Jurgens C (1997) BISON: a fast hybrid procedure for exactly solving the one-dimensional bin packing problem. Comput Oper Res 24(7): 627–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schwerin P, Wascher G (1997) The bin-packing problem: a problem generator and some numerical experiments with FFD packing and MTP. Int Trans Oper Res 4(5/6): 377–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Socha K, Knowles J, Samples M (2002) A max-min ant system for the university course timetabling problem. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on ant algorithm, ANTS 2002. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2463, pp 1–13Google Scholar
  50. Soubeiga E (2003) Development and application of hyperheuristics to personnel scheduling. PhD Thesis, The University of Nottingham, UKGoogle Scholar
  51. Sutton RS, Barto AG (1998) Reinforcement learning: an introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  52. Terashima-Marin H, Ross P, Valenzuela-Rendon M (1999) Evolution of constraint satisfaction strategies in examination timetabling. In: Proceedings of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference, GECCO 1999. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, pp 635–642Google Scholar
  53. Venkatraman S, Yen GG (2005) A generic framework for constrained optimization using genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 9(4): 424–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Waescher G, Gau T (1996) Heuristics for the integer one-dimensional cutting stock problem: a computational study. OR Spektrum 18: 131–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ruibin Bai
    • 1
  • Jacek Blazewicz
    • 2
  • Edmund K. Burke
    • 3
  • Graham Kendall
    • 3
  • Barry McCollum
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of Computer ScienceUniversity of NottinghamNottinghamUK
  2. 2.Institute of Computing SciencePoznan University of TechnologyPoznanPoland
  3. 3.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of NottinghamNottinghamUK
  4. 4.Department of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceQueen’s University BelfastBelfastUK

Personalised recommendations