Memetic Computing

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 97–112 | Cite as

The break scheduling problem: complexity results and practical algorithms

Regular research paper

Abstract

Break scheduling problems arise in working areas where breaks are indispensable, e.g., in air traffic control, supervision, or assembly lines. We regard such a problem from the area of supervision personnel. The objective is to find a break assignment for an existing shiftplan such that various constraints reflecting legal demands or ergonomic criteria are satisfied and such that staffing requirement violations are minimised. We prove the NP-completeness of this problem when all possible break patterns for each shift are given explicitly as part of the input. To solve our problem we propose two variations of a memetic algorithm. We define genetic operators, a local search based on three neighbourhoods, and a penalty system that helps to avoid local optima. Parameters influencing the algorithms are experimentally evaluated and assessed with statistical methods. We compare our algorithms, each with the best parameter setting according to the evaluation, with the state-of-the-art algorithm on a set of 30 real-life and randomly generated instances that are publicly available. One of our algorithms returns improved results on 28 out of the 30 benchmark instances. To the best of our knowledge, our improved results for the real-life instances constitute new upper bounds for this problem

Keywords

Break scheduling Complexity Memetic algorithms  Hybrid genetic algorithms Real-life application 

References

  1. 1.
    Aykin T (1996) Optimal shift scheduling with multiple break windows. Manag Sci 42:591–603CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aykin T (2000) A comparative evaluation of modelling approaches to the labour shift scheduling problem. Eur J Oper Res 125:381–397CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bechtold S, Jacobs L (1990) Implicit modelling of flexible break assignments in optimal shift scheduling. Manag Sci 36(11):1339–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beer A, Gaertner J, Musliu N, Schafhauser W, Slany W (2008) An iterated local search algorithm for a real-life break scheduling problem. In: Proceedings of Matheuristics 2008, 2nd international workshop on model based Metaheuristics, BertinoroGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beerm A, Gaertner J, Musliu N, Schafhauser W, Slany W (2008) Scheduling breaks in shift plans for call centers. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beer A, Gärtner J, Musliu N, Schafhauser W, Slany W (2010) An AI-based break-scheduling system for supervisory personnel. IEEE Intell Syst 25(2):60–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Burke EK, Cowling PI, Causmaecker PD, Berghe GV (2001) A memetic approach to the nurse rostering problem. Appl Intell 15(3):199–214Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Côté M-C, Gendron B, Quimper C-G, Rousseau L-M (2011) Formal languages for integer programming modeling of shift scheduling problems. Constraints 16(1):55–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Côté M-C, Gendron B, Rousseau L-M (2011) Grammar-based integer programming models for multiactivity shift scheduling. Manag Sci 57(1):151–163CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cotta C, Fernández AJ (2007) Memetic algorithms in planning, scheduling, and timetabling. Evolutionary scheduling. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dantzig GB (1954) A comment on Eddie’s traffic delays at toll booths. Oper Res 2:339–341MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dechter R, Meiri I, Pearl J (1991) Temporal constraint networks. Artif Intell 49:61–95CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Di Gaspero L, Gärtner J, Kortsarz G, Musliu N, Schaerf A, Slany W (2007) The minimum shift design problem. Ann Oper Res 155:79–105CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Garey M, Johnson D (1979) Computers and intractability: a guide to the theory of NP-completeness. W.H. Freeman, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gärtner J, Musliu N, Slany W (2004) A heuristic based system for generation of shifts with breaks. In: Proceedings of the 24th SGAI international conference on innovative techniques and applications of artificial intelligence, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gaspero LD, Gärtner J, Musliu N, Schaerf A, Schafhauser W, Slany W (2010) A hybrid LS-CP solver for the shifts and breaks design problem. In: Proceedings of the 7th international workshop on hybrid metaheuristics. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 46–61Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Glover F, Laguna M (1999) Tabu search. Handbook of combinatorial optimization, 3rd edn. Kluwer Academic Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldberg DE, Deb K (1990) A comparative analysis of selection schemes used in genetic algorithms. In: Foundations of genetic algorithms (FOGA). Morgan Kaufmann, San Franciso, pp 69–93Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Montgomery D (2005) Design and analysis of experiments. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moscato P (1989) On evolution, search, optimization, gas and martial arts: towards memetic algorithms. In: Technical report of Caltech concurrent computer programming report, vol 826. California Institute of Technology, PasadenaGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Musliu N, Schaerf A, Slany W (2004) Local search for shift design. Eur J Oper Res 153(1):51–64CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Musliu N, Schafhauser W, Widl M (2009) A memetic algorithm for a break scheduling problem. In: 8th Metaheuristic international conference, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Papadimitriou CH, Steiglitz K (1982) Combinatorial optimization: algorithms and complexity. Prentice Hall, London Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Quimper C-G, Rousseau L-M (2010) A large neighbourhood search approach to the multi-activity shift scheduling problem. J Heuristics 16(3):373–391Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rekik M, Cordeau J, Soumis F (2010) Implicit shift scheduling with multiple breaks and work stretch duration restrictions. J Sched 13:49–75Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schafhauser W (2010) TEMPLE—a domain specific language for modeling and solving real-life staff scheduling problems. PhD thesis, Vienna University of Technology, WienGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
    Tellier P, White G (2006) Generating personnel schedules in an industrial setting using a tabu search algorithm. In: Burke EK, Rudova H (eds) The 5th international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling, pp 293–302Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thompson G (1995) Improved implicit modeling of the labor shift scheduling problem. Manag Sci 41(4):595–607CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Widl M (2010) Memetic algorithms for break scheduling. Master’s thesis, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna http://www.kr.tuwien.ac.at/staff/widl/publications/Masterthesis.pdf. Accessed 14 March 2014
  31. 31.
    Widl M, Musliu N (2010) An improved memetic algorithm for break scheduling. In: Hybrid Metaheuristics, vol 6373 of LNCS, pp 133–147Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Knowledge-based Systems GroupVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria
  2. 2.Databases and Artificial Intelligence GroupVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations