Operational Research

, 5:241 | Cite as

Solving the airline crew recovery problem by a genetic algorithm with local improvement

  • Yufeng GuoEmail author
  • Leena Suhl
  • Markus P. Thiel


Within the complex and dynamic environment of the airline industry, any disturbance to normal operations has dramatic impact, and usually imposes high additional costs. Because of irregular events during day-to-day operations, airline crew schedules are rarely operated as planned in practice. Therefore, disrupted schedules should be recovered with as small changes as possible. In this article, we propose a genetic algorithm (GA) based approach, in which disrupted flights are reassigned within an evolutionary process. Because of the slow convergence rate achieved by conventional GA, a special local improvement procedure is applied in this approach. Computational results are reported for several disruption scenarios on real-life instances from a medium-sized European airline.


airline crew recovery airline crew rescheduling airline crew scheduling disruption management genetic algorithm meta-heuristic 


  1. Barnhart, C., Johnson, E. L., Nemhauser, G. L., Savelsbergh, M. W. P., Vance, P. H. (1998). Branch-and-price: Column generation for solving huge integer programs. Operations Research 46, 316–329.Google Scholar
  2. Barnhart, C., Johnson, E. L., Nemhauser, G. L., Vance, P. H. (1999). Crew scheduling. In: Hall, R. (Ed.), Handbook of Transportation Science. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Norwell, pp. 493–521.Google Scholar
  3. Beasley, J., Chu, P. (1996). A genetic algorithm for the set covering problem. European Journal of Operational Research 94, 392–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bölte, A., Thonemann, U. W. (1996). Optimizing simulated annealing schedules with genetic programming. European Journal of Operational Research 92 (2), 402–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carmen Systems AB (2004). Carmen integrated operations control. URL Scholar
  6. El Moudani, W., Cosenza, C., de Coligny, M., Mora-Camino, F. (2001). A bicriterion approach for the airline crew rostering problem. In: Zitzler, E., Deb, K., Thiele, L., Coello, C. A. C., Corne, D. (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization (EMO 2001). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 486–500.Google Scholar
  7. Fahle, T., Junker, U., Karisch, S., Kohl, N., Sellmann, M., Vaaben, B. (2002). Constraint programming based column generation for crew assignment. Journal of Heuristics 8, 59–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guo, Y., Mellouli, T., Suhl, L., Thiel, M. P. (2003). A partially integrated airline crew scheduling approach with time-dependent crew capacities and multiple home bases. Tech. rep. WP0303, DS&OR Lab., University of Paderborn, Germany, accepted by European Journal of Operational Research.Google Scholar
  9. Hartmann, S. (1998). A competitive genetic algorithm for resource-constrained project scheduling. Naval Research Logistics 45, 733–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoffman, K. L., Padberg, M. (1993). Solving airline crew scheduling problems by branch-and-cut. Management Science 39 (6), 657–682.Google Scholar
  11. Holland, J. (1975). Adaption in natural and artificial systems. The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  12. ILOG (2002). Cplex v8.0 User’s Manual. ILOG, France.Google Scholar
  13. Irrgang, M. E. (1995). Airline irregular operations. In: Jenkins, D., Ray, C. (Eds.), Handbook of airline economics, 1st Edition. McGrawHill Aviation Week Group, New York, pp. 349–365.Google Scholar
  14. Kohl, N. and Karisch, S. E. (2004). Airline crew rostering: Problem types, modeling, and optimization. Annals of Operations Research, 127: 223–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lettovský, L., Johnson, E. L., Nemhauser, G. L. (2000). Airline crew recovery. Transportation Science 34 (4), 337–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mellouli, T. (2001). A network flow approach to crew scheduling based on an analogy to a train/aircraft maintenance routing problem. In: Voß, S., Daduna, J. (Eds.), Computer-Aided Scheduling of Public Transport. Springer, Berlin, pp. 91–120.Google Scholar
  17. Michalewicz, Z., Fogel, D. B. (2000). How to Solve It: Modern Heuristics. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  18. Reeves, C. R. (1993). Modern heuristic techniques for combinatorial problems. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  19. Rosenberger, J. M., Johnson, E. L., Nemhauser, G. L. (2003). Rerouting aircraft for airline recovery. Transportation Science 37 (4), 408–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stojković, M., Soumis, F., Desrosiers, J. (1998). The operational airline crew scheduling problem. Transportation Science 32 (3), 232–245.Google Scholar
  21. Suhl, L. (1995). Computer-Aided Scheduling-An Airline Perspective. Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag (DUV), Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
  22. Suhl, U. H. (1994). MOPS: A Mathematical OPtimization System. European Journal of Operational Research 72, 312–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Thierens D. and Goldberg D. E. (1994). Convergence models of genetic algorithm selection schemes. In PPSN III: Proceedings of the International Conference on Evolutionary Computation. The Third Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, pages 119–129, London, UK, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  24. Wei, G., Yu, G., Song, M. (1997). Optimization model and algorithm for crew management during airline irregular operations. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization 1 (3), 305–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Yan, S., Lin, C. G. (1997). Airline scheduling for the temporary closure of airports. Transportation Science 31 (1), 72–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yu, G., Argüello, M., Song, G., McCowan, S. M., White, A. (2003). A new era for crew recovery at continental airlines. Interfaces 33 (1), 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Hellenic Operational Research Society 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Decision Support & OR Laboratory, and International Graduate School Dynamic Intelligent SystemsUniversity of PaderbornPaderbornGermany

Personalised recommendations