Perception & Psychophysics

, Volume 58, Issue 4, pp 527–539 | Cite as

Human performance on the traveling salesman problem

Article

Abstract

Two experiments on performance on the traveling salesman problem (TSP) are reported. The TSP consists of finding the shortest path through a set of points, returning to the origin. It appears to be an intransigent mathematical problem, and heuristics have been developed to find approximate solutions. The first experiment used 10-point, the second, 20-point problems. The experiments tested the hypothesis that complexity of TSPs is a function of number of nonboundary points, not total number of points. Both experiments supported the hypothesis. The experiments provided information on the quality of subjects’ solutions. Their solutions clustered close to the best known solutions, were an order of magnitude better than solutions produced by three well-known heuristics, and on average fell beyond the 99.9th percentile in the distribution of random solutions. The solution process appeared to be perceptually based.

References Attneave, F. (1982). Prägnanz and soap-bubble systems: A theoretical exploration. In J. Beck (Ed.), Organization and representation in perception (pp. 11-29). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

  1. Barton, G. E., Jr.,Berwick, R. C., &Ristad, E. S. (1987).Computational complexity and natural language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Boyd, S. C., Pulleyblank, W. R., &Cornuéjols, G. (1987). TRAVEL—an interactive travelling salesman problem package for the IBM personal computer.Operations Research Letters,6, 141–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buckmaster, J. K. (1992).Evaluating human performance on the travelling salesman problem using a Hypercard based system. Unpublished master’s thesis, Loughborough University of Technology.Google Scholar
  4. Dantzig, G. B., Fulkerson, D. R., &Johnson, S. M. (1959). On a linear-programming, combinatorial approach to the travellingsalesman problem.Operations Research,7, 58–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Flood, M. M. (1956). The travelling salesman problem.Operations Research,4, 61–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Garner, W. R. (1970). Good patterns have few alternatives.American Scientist,58, 34–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Golden, B., Bodin, L., Doyle, T., &Stewart, W. (1980). Approximate travelling salesman algorithms.Operations Research,28, 694–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Krolak, P., Felts, W., &Marble, G. (1971). A man-machine approach toward solving the travelling salesman problem.Communications of the ACM,14, 327–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Larkin, J. H. (1989). Display-based problem solving. In D. Klahr & K. Kotovsky (Eds.),Complex information processing (pp. 319–341). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Lee, R. K. L. (1985).A heuristic approach to the travelling salesman problem [Unpublished Management Report]. University of Victoria, School of Public Administration.Google Scholar
  11. Lung, C.-T., &Dominowski, R. L. (1985). Effects of strategy instructions and practice on nine-dot problem solving.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,11, 804–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Maier, N. R. F. (1930). Reasoning in humans: I. On direction.Journal of Comparative Psychology,100, 115–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Michie, D., Fleming, J. G., &Oldfield, J. V. (1968). A comparison of heuristic, interactive and unaided methods of solving a shortestroute problem. In D. Michie (Ed.),Machine intelligence (pp. 245–255). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  14. Norback, J. P., &Love, R. F. (1977). Geometric approaches to solving the travelling salesman problem.Management Science,23, 1208–1223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ormerod, T. C., & Chronicle, E. (1995, September).Rapid solution to perceptually presented intransigent problems: The case of the travelling salesman. Paper presented at the British Psychological Society Cognitive Section Conference, Bristol.Google Scholar
  16. Polivanova, N. I. (1974). On some functional and structural features of the visual-intuitive components of a problem-solving process.Voprosy Psikhologii [Questions of Psychology],4, 41–51.Google Scholar
  17. Pomerantz, J. R. (1981). Perceptual organization and information processing. In M. Kubovy & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.),Perceptual organization (pp. 141–180). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. Sangalli, A. (1992, December 12). Why sales reps pose a hard problem.New Scientist, pp. 24–28.Google Scholar
  19. Scheerer, M. (1963). Problem solving.Scientific American,208(4), 118–128.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Weisberg, R. W., &Alba, J. W. (1981). An examination of the alleged role of “fixation” in the solution of several “insight” problems.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,110, 169–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wilf, H. S. (1986).Algorithms and complexity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Loughborough University of TechnologyLoughboroughEngland

Personalised recommendations