Journal of Combinatorial Optimization

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 325–346 | Cite as

Scheduling internal audit activities: a stochastic combinatorial optimization problem

  • Roberto Rossi
  • S. Armagan Tarim
  • Brahim Hnich
  • Steven Prestwich
  • Semra Karacaer
Open Access
Article

Abstract

The problem of finding the optimal timing of audit activities within an organisation has been addressed by many researchers. We propose a stochastic programming formulation with Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) and Constraint Programming (CP) certainty-equivalent models. In experiments neither approach dominates the other. However, the CP approach is orders of magnitude faster for large audit times, and almost as fast as the MILP approach for small audit times. This work generalises a previous approach by relaxing the assumption of instantaneous audits, and by prohibiting concurrent auditing.

Keywords

Uncertainty Audit scheduling Combinatorial optimization Mathematical programming Constraint programming 

References

  1. Apt K (2003) Principles of constraint programming. Cambridge University Press, New York CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Birge JR, Louveaux F (1997) Introduction to stochastic programming. Springer, New York MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Bookbinder JH, Tan JY (1988) Strategies for the probabilistic lot-sizing problem with service-level constraints. Manag Sci 34:1096–1108 MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Boritz JE, Broca DS (1986) Scheduling internal audit activities. Auditing A J Pract Theory 6:1–19 Google Scholar
  5. Brailsford SC, Potts CN, Smith BM (1999) Constraint satisfaction problems: Algorithms and applications. Eur J Oper Res 119:557–581 MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Charnes A, Cooper WW (1959) Chance-constrained programming. Manag Sci 6(1):73–79 MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Chvtal V (1983) Linear programming. Freeman, New York Google Scholar
  8. Colmerauer A (1985) Prolog in 10 figures. Commun ACM 28(12):1296–1310 CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Dantzig GB (1951) Maximization of a linear function of variables subject to linear inequalities. In: Activity analysis of production and allocation. Wiley, New York (Chap XXI) Google Scholar
  10. Dantzig GB (1963) Linear programming and extensions. Princeton University Press, Princeton MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Darby-Dowman K, Little J, Mitra G, Zaffalon M (1997) Constraint logic programming and integer programming approaches and their collaboration in solving an assignment scheduling problem. Constraints 1(3):245–264 MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Hanus M (1998) Programming with constraints: An introduction by K Marriott and PJ Stuckey. MIT Press, Cambridge. See also J Funct Program 11(2):253–262 (2001) Google Scholar
  13. Hughes J (1977) Optimal internal audit timing. Account Rev 52:56–68 Google Scholar
  14. Ilog (2007a) CPLEX 9.0 Users Manual. ILOG Inc, Incline Village, NV Google Scholar
  15. Ilog (2007b) OPL Studio 3.7 Users Manual. ILOG Inc, Incline Village, NV Google Scholar
  16. Jain V, Grossmann IE (2001) Algorithms for hybrid milp/cp models for a class of optimization problems. INFORMS J Comput 13:258–276 CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Jeffreys H (1961) Theory of probability. Clarendon, Oxford MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Knechel WR, Benson HP (1991) The optimization approach for scheduling internal audits of division. Decis Sci 22:391–405 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lustig IJ, Puget JF (2001) Program does not equal program: Constraint programming and its relationship to mathematical programming. Interfaces 31:29–53 Google Scholar
  20. Nemhauser GL, Wolsey LA (1988) Integer and combinatorial optimization. Wiley-Interscience, New York MATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Proll L, Smith B (1998) Integer linear programming and constraint logic programming approaches to a template design problem. INFORMS J Comput 10:265–275 MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Regin J-C (1994) A filtering algorithm for constraints of difference in CSPS. In: Proceedings of the national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI-94), Seattle, WA, USA, pp 362–367 Google Scholar
  23. Regin J-C (2003) Global constraints and filtering algorithms. In: Milano M (ed) Constraints and integer programming combined. Kluwer, Dordrecht Google Scholar
  24. Schrijver A (1986) Theory of linear and integer programming. Wiley, New York MATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Smith B, Brailsford S, Hubbard P, Williams HP (1995) The progressive party problem: integer linear programming and constraint programming compared. In: CP95: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on principles and practice of constraint programming, Marseilles Google Scholar
  26. Tarim SA, Smith B (2008) Constraint programming for computing non-stationary (R,S) inventory policies. Eur J Oper Res 189(3):1004–1021 MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. Tarim SA, Tayfur O, Karacaer S (2008) A mip model for scheduling multi-location internal audit activities. Technical report, Hacettepe University, Dept of Management Google Scholar
  28. Tsang EPK (1993) Foundations of constraint satisfaction. Academic Press, London/San Diego Google Scholar
  29. Van Hentenryck P, Carillon JP (1988) Generality vs. specificity: an experience with AI and or techniques. In: Proceedings of the national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI-88) Google Scholar
  30. Van Hentenryck P (1989) Constraint satisfaction in logic programming. MIT Press, Cambridge Google Scholar
  31. Van Hentenryck P (1999) The OPL optimization programming language. MIT Press, Cambridge Google Scholar
  32. Ventsel ES (1979) Theory of probability. Nauka, Moscow (in Russian) Google Scholar
  33. Williams HP (1994) Model building in mathematical programming, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York Google Scholar
  34. Wilson D, Ranson R (1971) Internal audit scheduling—a mathematical model. The Internal Auditor, No. July–August, pp. 42–50 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roberto Rossi
    • 1
    • 2
  • S. Armagan Tarim
    • 3
  • Brahim Hnich
    • 4
  • Steven Prestwich
    • 1
  • Semra Karacaer
    • 3
  1. 1.Cork Constraint Computation CentreUniversity CollegeCorkIreland
  2. 2.Centre for Telecommunication Value-Chain Driven ResearchUniversity CollegeDublinIreland
  3. 3.Department of ManagementHacettepe UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  4. 4.Faculty of Computer ScienceIzmir University of EconomicsIzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations