Journal of Scheduling

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 489–506 | Cite as

A decomposition approach for commodity pickup and delivery with time-windows under uncertainty

Article

Abstract

We consider a special class of large-scale, network-based, resource allocation problems under uncertainty, namely that of multi-commodity flows with time-windows under uncertainty. In this class, we focus on problems involving commodity pickup and delivery with time-windows. Our work examines methods of proactive planning, that is, robust plan generation to protect against future uncertainty. By a priori modeling uncertainties in data corresponding to service times, resource availability, supplies and demands, we generate solutions that are more robust operationally, that is, more likely to be executed or easier to repair when disrupted. We propose a novel modeling and solution framework involving a decomposition scheme that separates problems into a routing master problem and Scheduling Sub-Problems; and iterates to find the optimal solution. Uncertainty is captured in part by the master problem and in part by the Scheduling Sub-Problem. We present proof-of-concept for our approach using real data involving routing and scheduling for a large shipment carrier’s ground network, and demonstrate the improved robustness of solutions from our approach.

Keywords

Robust routing and scheduling Multi-commodity routing and scheduling Uncertainty Decomposition 

References

  1. Ahuja, R., Magnanti, T., & Orlin, J. (1993). Network flows: Theory, algorithms and applications. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Barnhart, C., Hane, C. A., Johnson, E. L., Sigismondi, G. (1994). A column generation and partitioning approach for multi-commodity flow problems. Telecommunication Systems, 3, 239–258, ISSN 1018–4864. doi:10.1007/BF02110307.
  3. Barnhart, C., Johnson, E., Nemhauser, G., Savelsbergh, M., & Vance, P. (1998a). Branch-and-price: Column generation for solving huge integer programs. Operations Research, 46, 316–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ben-Tal, A., & Nemirovski, A. (1999). Robust solutions to uncertain programs. Operations Research Letters, 25, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ben-Tal, A., & Nemirovski, A. (2000). Robust solutions of linear programming problems contaminated with uncertain data. Mathematical Programming, 88, 411–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bertsimas, D., & Sim, M. (2003). Robust discrete optimization and network flows. Mathematical Programming Series B, 98, 49–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertsimas, D., & Sim, M. (2004). The price of robustness. Operations Research, 52(1), 35–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bertsimas, D., & Simchi-Levi, D. (1996). A new generation of vehicle routing research: Robust algorithms, addressing uncertainty. Operations Research, 44(2), 286–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Birge, J., & Louveaux, F. (1997). Introduction to stochastic programming. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1959). Chance constrained programming. Management Science, 6(1), 73–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1963). Deterministic equivalents for optimizing and satisficing under chance constraints. Operations Research, 11(1), 18–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cordeau, J., Laporte, G., Potvin, J., & Savelsbergh, M. (2006). Transportation on demand. Section: Handbook of operations research (Vol. 2). Montreal, QC: Centre for Research on Transportation.Google Scholar
  13. Cordeau, J.-F., Laporte, G., Potvin, J.-Y., & Savelsbergh, M. W. P. (2007). Transportation on demand. In C. Barnhart & G. Laporte (Eds.), Transportation, Handbooks in operations research and management science (Vol. 14, pp. 429–466). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  14. Desrosiers, J., Dumas, Y., Solomon, M. M., & Soumis, F. (1995). Time constrained routing and scheduling. In M. Ball (Ed.), Handbook in operations research/ management science, network routing. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  15. Dessouky, M., Hall, R., Nowroozi, A., & Mourikas, K. (1999). Bus dispatching at timed transfer transit stations using bus tracking technology. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 7, 187–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dror, M., Laporte, G., & Trudeau, P. (1989). Vehicle routing with stochastic demands: Properties and solution frameworks. Transportation Science, 23(3), 166–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dumas, Y., Desrosiers, J., & Soumis, F. (1991). The pickup and delivery problem with time windows. European Journal of Operational Research, 54(1), 7–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Garey, M. R., & Johnson, D. S. (1979). Computers and intractability: A guide to the THEORY of NP-completeness. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
  19. Jiang, H., & Barnhart, C. (2009). Dynamic airline scheduling. Transportation Science, 43(3), 336–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kang, L. S., & Clarke, J.-P. (2002). Degradable airline scheduling. Working paper. Operations Research Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  21. Lan, S., Clarke, J.-P., & Barnhart, C. (2006). Planning for robust airline operations: Optimizing aircraft routings and flight departure times to minimize passenger disruptions. Transportation Science, 40(1), 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mahr, T. (2011). Vehicle routing under uncertainty. Master’s thesis, Budapest University of Technology and Economics. Google Scholar
  23. Marla, L. (2007). Robust optimization for network-based resource allocation problems. Masters thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  24. Marla, L. (2010). Airline schedule planning and operations: Optimization-based approaches for delay mitigation. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  25. Marla, L., & Barnhart, C. (2011). A decomposition approach to dynamic airline scheduling. Working paper.Google Scholar
  26. Mulvey, J. M., Vanderbei, R. J., & Zeinos, S. A. (1981). Robust optimization of large-scale systems. Operations Research, 43, 34–56.Google Scholar
  27. Nuutila, E., & Soisalon-Soininen, E. (1994). On finding the strongly connected components in a directed graph. Information Processing Letters, 49, 9–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ordonez, F., & Zhao, J. (2011). Robust capacity expansion of network flows. Technical report, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
  29. Paraskevopoulos, D., Karakitsos, E., & Rustem, B. (1991). Robust capacity planning under uncertainty. Management Science, 37(7), 787–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rockafellar, R. T., & Uryasev, S. (2000). Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. The Journal of Risk, 2(3), 21–41.Google Scholar
  31. Shebalov, S., & Klabjan, D. (2004). Robust airline crew pairing: Move-up crews. Working paper, The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. http://netfiles.uiuc.edu/klabjan/www
  32. Soyster, A. L. (1973). Convex programming with set-inclusive constraints and applications to inexact linear programming. Operations Research, 21(5), 1154–1157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sungur, I., Ordonez, F., Dessouky, M. M., Ren, Y., & Zhong, H. (2010). A model and algorithm for the courier delivery problem with uncertainty. Transportation Science, 44, 193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tarjan, R. (1972). Depth first search and linear graph algorithms. Journal of Computing, 1(2), 146–160.Google Scholar
  35. Wollmer, R. D. (1980). Investment in stochastic minimum cost generalized multicommodity networks with application to coal transport. Networks, 10(4), 351–362, ISSN 1097–0037. doi:10.1002/net.3230100406.Google Scholar
  36. Wood, D. (1997). An algorithm for finding a maximum clique in a graph. Operations Research Letters, 21, 211–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yang, J., Jaillet, P., & Mahmassani, H. (2004). Real-time multivehicle truckload pickup and delivery problems. Transportation Science, 38(2), 135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Enterprise Systems EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Operations Research CenterMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.Heinz CollegeCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations