Abstract
A general description of genetic algorithms is given. An optimal scheduling problem is examined from the viewpoint of real needs of a modern university. A solution, based on a genetic algorithm, is proposed for the problem. The genetic algorithm implementations are reviewed and their convergence rate and quality are analyzed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
H. Muhlenbein and D. Schlierkamp-Voosen, “Predictive models for the breeder genetic algorithm,” Evolutionary Computation, 1, No. 1, 25-50 (1993).
J. J. Grefensette and J. E. Baker, “How genetic algorithms work: A critical look at implicit parallelism,” in: Proc. 3rd Intern. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1989), pp. 20-27.
A. E. Eiben, P.-E. Raue, and Z. Ruttkay, “Genetic algorithms with multi-parent recombination,” in: Proc. 3rd Conf. on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1994), pp. 78-87.
G. Syswerda, “Uniform crossover in genetic algorithms,” in: Proc. 3rd Intern. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1989), pp. 2-9.
N. J. Radcliffe, “Equivalence class analysis of genetic algorithms,” Complex Systems, 5, No. 2, 183-205 (1990).
Yu. V. Kapitonova and A. A. Letichevskii, “Theorem proving in a mathematical information environment,” Kibern. Sist. Analiz, No. 4, 3-12 (1998).
J. H. Holland, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems, The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor (1975).
R. Poli, “Exact schema theory for genetic programming and variable-length genetic algorithms with one-point crossover,” in: Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, Morgan Kaufmann, Las Vegas (2001), pp. 469 476.
T. Blickle and L. Thiele, “A mathematical analysis of tournament selection,” in: Proc. 6th Intern. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms (ICGA' 95), Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1995), pp. 9-16.
D. Whitley, “The GENITOR algorithm and selection pressure,” in: J. D. Schaffer (ed.), Proc. 3rd Intern. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1989), pp. 116-121.
J. Hesser and R. Manner, “Towards an optimal mutation probability for genetic algorithms,” Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, 11, 96-119 (1991).
T. Haynes, R. Wainwright, S. Sen, and D. Schoenefeld, “Strongly typed genetic programming in evolving cooperation strategies,” in: Proc. 6th Intern. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1995), pp. 271-278.
T. Jansen and I. Wegener, “On the choice of the mutation probability for the (1 + 1) EA,” Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, 6, 233-239 (2000).
T.C. Fogarty, “Varying the probability of mutation in the genetic algorithm,” in: Proc. 3rd Intern. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, La Jolla, CA (1989), pp. 104-109.
R. Poli and W. B. Langdon, “Genetic programming with one-point crossover,” in: Proc. 2nd On-line World Conf. on Soft Computing in Engineering Design and Manufacturing, Springer-Verlag, London (1997).
T. Blickle and L. Thiel, “Genetic programming and redundancy,” in: Genetic Algorithms within the Framework of Evolutionary Computation, Max-Plank-Institut für Informatik, Saarbrucken (1994), pp. 33-38.
S. Evan, A. Itai, and A. Shamir, “On the complexity of timetable and multicom-modify flow problems,” SIAM J. Comp., 5, No. 4, 691-703 (1976).
W. Erben and K. Keppler, “A general algorithm for solving a weekly course timetabling problem”, in: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1153, Springer-Verlag, London (1999), pp. 198-211.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Glibovets, N.N., Medvid', S.A. Genetic Algorithms Used to Solve Scheduling Problems. Cybernetics and Systems Analysis 39, 81–90 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023825226796
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023825226796