Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines

, Volume 3, Issue 4, pp 345–361 | Cite as

Fast Ant Colony Optimization on Runtime Reconfigurable Processor Arrays

  • Daniel Merkle
  • Martin Middendorf


Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) is a metaheuristic used to solve combinatorial optimization problems. As with other metaheuristics, like evolutionary methods, ACO algorithms often show good optimization behavior but are slow when compared to classical heuristics. Hence, there is a need to find fast implementations for ACO algorithms. In order to allow a fast parallel implementation, we propose several changes to a standard form of ACO algorithms. The main new features are the non-generational approach and the use of a threshold based decision function for the ants. We show that the new algorithm has a good optimization behavior and also allows a fast implementation on reconfigurable processor arrays. This is the first implementation of the ACO approach on a reconfigurable architecture. The running time of the algorithm is quasi-linear in the problem size n and the number of ants on a reconfigurable mesh with n2 processors, each provided with only a constant number of memory words.

ACO reconfigurable architectures quadratic assignment 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    A. Bauer, B. Bullnheimer, R. F. Hartl, and C. Strauss, “Minimizing total tardiness on a single machine using ant colony optimization,” Central European Journal of Operations Research, vol. 8, pp. 125–141, 2000.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. L den Besten, T. Stützle, and M. Dorigo, “Ant colony optimization for the total weighted tardiness problem,” in Parallel Problem Solving from Nature: 6th International Conference, M. Schoenauer et al. (eds.), Springer: Berlin, LNCS, vol. 1917, pp. 611–620, 2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Bondalapati and V. K. Prasanna, “Reconfigurable meshes: Theory and practice,” in Proc. Recon-figurable Architectures Workshop, R. W. Hartenstein and Viktor K. Prasanna (eds.), April 1, 1997, Geneva, Switzerland, ITpress Verlag: Bruchsal.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    B. Bullnheimer, G. Kotsis, and C. Strauss, “Parallelization strategies for the ant system,” in High Performance Algorithms and Software in Nonlinear Optimization, R. De Leone, A. Murli, P. Pardalos, and G. Toraldo (eds.), Series: Applied Optimization, Kluwer: Dordrecht, vol. 24, pp. 87–100, 1998.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. K. Congram, C. N. Potts, and S. L. van de Velde, “An iterated dynasearch algorithm for the singlemachine total weighted tardiness scheduling problem,” Working Paper, University of Southampton, UK, 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Dorigo and G. Di Caro, “The ant colony optimization meta-heuristic,” in New Ideas in Optimization, D. Corne, M. Dorigo, F. Glover (eds.), McGraw-Hill: London, pp. 11–32, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Dorigo and L. M. Gambardella, “Ant colonies for the QAP,” Technical Report IDSIA-4-97, IDSIA, Lugano, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Dorigo and L. M. Gambardella, “Ant colony system: A cooperative learning approach to the traveling salesman problem,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 1, pp. 53–66, 1997.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. M. Gambardella, E. Taillard, and M. Dorigo, “Ant colonies for the quadratic assignment problem,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, vol. 50, pp. 167–176, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Hartmann, and R. Kolisch, “Experimental evaluation of state-of-the-art heuristics for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 127, pp. 394–407, 2000.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    V. Maniezzo, “Exact and approximate nondeterministic tree-search procedures for the quadratic assignment problem,” INFORMS Journal on Computing, vol. 11, pp. 358–368, 1999.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    V. Maniezzo, A. Colorni, and M. Dorigo, “The ant system applied to the quadratic assignment problem,” Tech. Rep. IRIDIA/94-28, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium, 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    V. Maniezzo and A. Colorni, “The ant system applied to the quadratic assignment problem,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 11, pp. 769–778, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Merkle and M. Middendorf, “An ant algorithm with global pheromone evaluation for scheduling a single machine,” Applied Intelligence, to appear.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. Merkle, M. Middendorf, and H. Schmeck, “Ant colony optimization for resource-constrained project scheduling,” in Proc. of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO-2000), D. Whitley et al. (eds.), Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 893–900, 2000.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    N. Meuleau and M. Dorigo, “Ant Colony Optimization and Stochastic Gradient Descent,” Tech. Rep. IRIDIA/2000-36, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium, 2000.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    R. Michels and M. Middendorf, “An ant system for the shortest common supersequence problem,” in New Ideas in Optimization, D. Corne, M. Dorigo, and F. Glover (eds.) McGraw-Hill, pp. 51–61, 1999.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Middendorf, “Bit-summation on the reconfigurable mesh,” in Parallel and Distributed Computing, Proc. of the 11 IPPS/SPDP'99 Workshops, 6th Reconfigurable Architectures Workshop RAW-99, J. Rolim et al. (eds.), Springer: Berlin, LNCS, vol. 1586, pp. 625–633, 1999.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Middendorf, F. Reischle, and H. Schmeck, “Multi colony ant algorithms,” Journal of Heuristics, vol. 8, pp. 305–320, 2002.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. Miller, V. K. Prasanna-Kumar, D. I. Reisis, and Q. F. Stout, “Parallel computations on reconfigurable meshes,” IEEE Trans. Comput., vol. 42, pp. 678–692, 1993.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    K. Nakano and K. Wada, “Integer summing algorithms on reconfigurable meshes,” Theoret. Comput. Sci., vol. 197, pp. 57–77, 1998.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    T. Stützle, “An ant approach for the flow shop problem,” in Proc. 6th European Congress on Intelligent Techniques & Soft Computing (EUFIT '98), Verlag Mainz: Aachen, vol. 3, pp. 1560–1564, 1998.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    T. Stützle and M. Dorigo, “ACO algorithms for the quadratic assignment problem,” in New Ideas in Optimization, D. Corne, M. Dorigo, and F. Glover (eds.), McGraw-Hill, pp. 33–50, 1999.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    T. Stützle and H. H. Hoos, “The MAX-MIN ant system,” Future Generation Computer Systems, vol. 16, pp. 889–914, 2000.Google Scholar
  25. 25. Scholar
  26. 26. /Prod/psplib/index.html.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Merkle
    • 1
  • Martin Middendorf
    • 1
  1. 1.Parallel Computing and Complex Systems Group, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations