Computational Optimization and Applications

, Volume 56, Issue 1, pp 97–111 | Cite as

Algorithmic improvements on dynamic programming for the bi-objective {0,1} knapsack problem

  • José Rui Figueira
  • Luís PaqueteEmail author
  • Marco Simões
  • Daniel Vanderpooten


This paper presents several methodological and algorithmic improvements over a state-of-the-art dynamic programming algorithm for solving the bi-objective {0,1} knapsack problem. The variants proposed make use of new definitions of lower and upper bounds, which allow a large number of states to be discarded. The computation of these bounds are based on the application of dichotomic search, definition of new bound sets, and bi-objective simplex algorithms to solve the relaxed problem. Although these new techniques are not of a common application for dynamic programming, we show that the best variants tested in this work can lead to an average improvement of 10 to 30 % in CPU-time and significant less memory usage than the original approach in a wide benchmark set of instances, even for the most difficult ones in the literature.


Bi-objective 0-1 knapsack problems Multi-objective combinatorial optimization Bounds sets Dichotomic search Bi-objective simplex algorithm 



The authors acknowledge the anonymous referee that suggested the second version of variant B-DP3. J.R. Figueira, L. Paquete and D. Vanderpooten acknowledge the financial support from the Luso-French bilateral cooperation agreement between LAMSADE and CEG-IST (FCT/CNRS 2009). J.R. Figueira and M. Simões acknowledge a grant from CEG-IST, Instituto Superior Técnico (PTDC/GES/73853/2006). D. Vanderpooten acknowledges the support by the project ANR-09-BLAN-0361 “GUaranteed Efficiency for PAReto optimal solutions Determination (GUEPARD)”.


  1. 1.
    Aneja, Y., Nair, K.: Bicriteria transportation problem. Manag. Sci. 25(1), 73–78 (1979) MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bazgan, C., Hugot, H., Vanderpooten, D.: Implementing an efficient fptas for the 0-1 multi-objective knapsack problem. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 198(1), 47–56 (2009) MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bazgan, C., Hugot, H., Vanderpooten, D.: Solving efficiently the 0-1 multi-objective knapsack problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 36(1), 260–279 (2009) MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Captivo, M., Clímaco, J., Figueira, J., Martins, E., dos Santos, J.: Solving bicriteria 0-1 knapsack problems using a labeling algorithm. Comput. Oper. Res. 30(12), 1865–1886 (2003) MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cormen, T., Leiserson, C., Rivest, R., Stein, C.: Introduction to Algorithms. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001) zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Erlebach, T., Kellerer, H., Pferschy, U.: Approximating multi-objective knapsack problems. Manag. Sci. 48(12), 1603–1612 (2002) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gomes da Silva, C., Clímaco, J., Figueira, J.: A scatter search method for bi-criteria {0,1}-knapsack problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 169(2), 373–391 (2006) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gomes da Silva, C., Clímaco, J., Figueira, J.: Core problems in bi-criteria {0, 1}-knapsack problems. Comput. Oper. Res. 35(7), 2292–2306 (2008) MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gomes da Silva, C., Figueira, J., Clímaco, J.: Integrating partial optimization with scatter search for solving bi-criteria {0, 1}-knapsack problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 177(3), 1656–1677 (2007) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jenkins, L.: A bicriteria knapsack program for planning remediation of contaminated lightstation sites. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 140(2), 427–433 (2002) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Klamroth, K., Wiecek, M.M.: Dynamic programming approaches to the multiple criteria knapsack problem. Nav. Res. Logist. 47(1), 57–76 (2000) MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kellerer, H., Pferschy, U., Pisinger, D.: Knapsack Problems. Springer, Berlin (2004) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kostreva, M., Ogryczak, W., Tonkyn, D.: Relocation problems arising in conservation biology. Comput. Math. Appl. 37(4–5), 135–150 (1999) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ehrgott, M., Gandibleux, X.: Bound sets for biobjective combinatorial optimization problems. Comput. Oper. Res. 34(9), 2674–2694 (2007) MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Martello, S., Toth, P.: Knapsack Problems—Algorithms and Computer Implementations. Wiley, New York (1990) zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nemhauser, G., Ullmann, Z.: Discrete dynamic programming and capital allocation. Manag. Sci. 15(9), 494–505 (1969) MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pisinger, D.: A minimal algorithm for the 0-1 knapsack problem. Oper. Res. 45, 758–767 (1997) MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rosenblatt, M., Sinuany-Stern, Z.: Generating the discrete efficient fronteir to the capital budgeting problem. Oper. Res. 37(3), 384–394 (1989) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Steuer, R.: Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation and Application. Wiley, New York (1986) zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Teng, J., Tzeng, G.: A multiobjective programming approach for selecting non-independent transportation investiment alternatives. Transp. Res., Part B, Methodol. 30(4), 201–307 (1996) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Visée, M., Teghem, J., Pirlot, M., Ulungu, E.L.: Two-phases method and branch and bound procedures to solve the bi–objective knapsack problem. J. Glob. Optim. 12(2), 139–155 (1998) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • José Rui Figueira
    • 1
  • Luís Paquete
    • 2
    Email author
  • Marco Simões
    • 2
  • Daniel Vanderpooten
    • 3
  1. 1.CEG-IST, Center for Management Studies, Instituto Superior TécnicoTechnical University of LisbonPorto SalvoPortugal
  2. 2.CISUC, Department of Informatics EngineeringUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal
  3. 3.University Paris-DauphineParis Cedex 16France

Personalised recommendations