International Journal of Fuzzy Systems

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 119–129 | Cite as

A Fuzzy Logic and Binary-Goal Programming-Based Approach for Solving the Exam Timetabling Problem to Create a Balanced-Exam Schedule

Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

This study presents a fuzzy logic and binary-goal programming-based approach for solving the exam timetabling problem to create a balanced-exam schedule. To be able to address the practical challenges of the exam timetabling problem, the model is developed with and verified by a human expert for exam scheduling. We propose a fuzzy-criticality level identification methodology to assign the criticality levels of exams for the students using three pieces of information, namely, credits, success ratios, and types of the classes. It is noted that the computed criticality levels are close approximates for those of the human expert. We then present a goal programming model to schedule exams using these criticality levels as well as other general problem data. The result of the goal program is a balanced-exam schedule in terms of exam criticality levels. Final step includes room assignments using a simple algorithm. The significance of the study is the consideration of the exam criticalities, for not only the students of the same year but also the students with different levels of seniority, as well as an even distribution of exams for professors which make the problem more challenging for the human expert in practice. Using a real-life problem, we show that our approach creates an exam schedule that is more preferable than the one prepared by the human expert. Additionally, computational results show the potential of our model to be used in real-life problems of larger-size.

Keywords

Exam timetabling Balanced-exam schedule Integer programming Goal programming Multi-criteria optimization Fuzzy logic 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank to the staff of the Faculty of the Engineering and the Department of Industrial Engineering of Uludag University on behalf of Erdal Emel, the department head, for the support provided.

References

  1. 1.
    Johnes, J.: Operations research in education. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 243(3), 683–696 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Yakoob, S.M., Sherali, H.D.: Mathematical programming models and algorithms for a class-faculty assignment problem. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 173, 488–507 (2006)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Daskalaki, S., Birbas, T., Housos, E.: An integer programming formulation for a case study in university timetabling. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 153, 117–135 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Daskalaki, S., Birbas, T.: Efficient solutions for a university timetabling problem through integer programming. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 160, 106–120 (2005)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Philips, A.E., Waterer, H., Ehrgott, M., Ryan, D.M.: Integer programming methods for large-scale practical classroom assignment problems. Comput. Oper. Res. 53, 42–53 (2015)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Al-Yakoob, S.M., Sherali, H.D.: Mathematical models and algorithms for a high school timetabling problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 61, 56 (2015)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alzaqebah, M., Abdullah, S.: Hybrid bee colony optimization for examination timetabling problems. Comput. Oper. Res. 54, 142–154 (2015)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burke, E.K., Newall, J.P.: Solving examination timetabling problems through adaption of heuristic orderings. Ann. Oper. Res. 129, 107–134 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carter, M.W., Laporte, G., Lee, S.Y.: Examination timetabling: algorithmic strategies and applications. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 47(3), 373–383 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Babaei, H., Karimpour, J., Hadidi, A.: A survey of approaches for university course timetabling problem. Comput. Ind. Eng. (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2014.11.010
  11. 11.
    Burke, E.K., Jackson, K., Kingston, J.H., Weare, R.F.: Automated university timetabling: the state of the art. Comput. J. 40(9), 565–571 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burke, E.K., Petrovic, S.: Recent research directions in automated timetabling. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 140, 266–280 (2002)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schaerf, A.: A survey of automated timetabling. Artif. Intell. Rev. 13, 87–127 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schmidt, G., Strohlein, T.: Timetable construction an annotated bibliography. Comput. J. 23(4), 307–316 (1980)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Burke, E.K., Elliman, D.G., Ford, P.H., Weare, R.F.: Examination Timetabling in British Universities: A Survey. Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling I, pp. 76–90. Springer, Berlin (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carter, M.W.: OR practice—a survey of practical applications of examination timetabling algorithms. Oper. Res. 34(2), 193–202 (1986)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Carter, M.W., Laporte, G.: Recent Developments in Practical Examination Timetabling. Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling I, pp. 3–21. Springer, Berlin (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Qu, R., Burke, E.K., McCollum, B., Merlot, L.T.G., Lee, S.Y.: A survey of search methodologies and automated system development for examination timetabling. J. Sched. 12, 55–89 (2009)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Carter, M.W., Laporte, G., Chinneck, J.W.: A general examination scheduling system. Interfaces 24, 109–120 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Al-Yakoob, S.M., Sherali, H.D., Al-Jazzaf, M.: A mixed-integer mathematical programming modeling approach to exam timetabling. Comput. Manag. Sci. 7, 19–46 (2010)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Burke, E.K., Bykov, Y., Petrovic, S.: A Multicriteria Approach to Examination Timetabling. Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling III, pp. 104–117. Springer, Berlin (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brailsford, S.C., Potts, C.N., Smith, B.M.: Constraint satisfaction problems: algorithms and applications. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 119, 557–581 (1999)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    MirHassani, S.A.: Improving paper spread in examination timetables using integer programming. Appl. Math. Comput. 179(2), 702–706 (2006)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Anderson, J.M., Bernhard, R.H.: A university examination-scheduling model to minimize multiple-examination days for students. Decis. Sci. 12(2), 231–239 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ismayilova, N.A., Sagir, M., Gasimov, R.N.: A multiobjective faculty-course-time slot assignment problem with preferences. Math. Comput. Model. 46, 1017–1029 (2007)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ozdemir, M.S., Gasimov, R.N.: The analytic hierarchy process and multiobjective 0–1 faculty course assignment. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 157, 398–408 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zadeh, L.: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8, 338–353 (1965)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nguyen, H.T.: On foundations of fuzzy theory for soft computing. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 8(1), 39–45 (2006)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Azadegan, A., Porobic, L., Ghazinoory, S., Samouei, P., Kheirkhah, A.S.: Fuzzy logic in manufacturing: a review of literature and a specialized application. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 132(2), 258–270 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kar, S., Das, S., Ghosh, P.K.: Applications of neuro fuzzy systems: a brief review and future outline. Appl. Soft Comput. 15, 243–259 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kobbacy, K.A., Vadera, S., Rasmi, M.: AI and OR in management of operations: history and trends. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 58, 10–28 (2007)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Melin, P., Castillo, O.: A review on type-2 fuzzy logic applications in clustering, classification and pattern recognition. Appl. Soft Comput. 21, 568–577 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bellman, R.E., Zadeh, L.A.: Decision-making in a fuzzy environment. Manag. Sci. 17(4), B-141–B-164 (1970)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Carlsson, C., Fuller, R.: Fuzzy multiple criteria decision making: recent developments. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 78(2), 139–153 (1996)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tao, Z., Chen, H., Zhou, L., Liu, J.: A generalized multiple attributes group decision making approach based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 16(2), 184–195 (2014)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yu, D.: Group decision making under multiplicative hesitant fuzzy environment. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 16(2), 233–241 (2014)MATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tsai, C.M., Yeh, Z.M.: Classifying student’s attentiveness via spatial-temporal fuzzy logic classification. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 16(4), 541–553 (2014)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Asmuni, H., Burke, E.K., Garibaldi, J.M., McCollum, B.: An investigation of fuzzy multiple heuristics orderings in the construction of university exam timetables. Comput. Oper. Res. 36(4), 981–1001 (2009)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Taiwan Fuzzy Systems Association and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringUludag UniversityNiluferTurkey

Personalised recommendations