Skip to main content

Greedy Heuristics and Weight-Coded EAs for Multidimensional Knapsack Problems and Multi-Unit Combinatorial Auctions

  • Conference paper
Operations Research Proceedings 2007

Part of the book series: Operations Research Proceedings ((ORP,volume 2007))

Abstract

The multidimensional knapsack problem (MDKP) is a generalized variant of the \( \mathcal{N}\mathcal{P} \)-complete knapsack problem (KP). The MDKP assumes one knapsack being packed with a number of items x j so that the total profit Σpj of the selected items is maximized. In contrast to the standard KP, each item has m different properties (dimensions) r ij (i = 1, ...,m; j = 1, ..., n) consuming c i of the knapsack:

$$ maximize{\text{ }}\sum\limits_{j{\text{ = 1}}}^n {p_j x_j } $$
(1)
$$ \begin{gathered} subject\ to \sum\limits_{j = 1}^n {r_{ij} x_j} \leqslant c_i ,i = 1,...,m \\ with\; x_j \in \{0,1\} ,j = 1,...,n, p_j ,c_i \in \mathbb{N}, r_{ij} \in \mathbb{N}_0 \end{gathered} $$
(2)

A number of relevant real-world problems can be modelled as MDKPs such as allocation problems, logistics problems, or cutting stock problems [6]. Recently [4], it has been noticed that also the winner determination problem (WDP) in the context of multi-unit combinatorial auctions (MUCA) can be modelled as MDKP. MUCAs are combinatorial auctions (CA) where multiple copies of each good are available. In CAs, bidding is allowed on bundles of goods, which allows bidders to express synergies between those goods they want to obtain. First, the agents submit their bids and then, the auctioneer allocates the goods to the agents so that his revenue is maximized. The revenue is the sum of all submitted bids which are accepted by the auctioneer. This allocation problem is called the WDP1.

The profit p j used in the MDKP corresponds to the price of bid j, while the resource consumption r ij corresponds to the number of units of good i requested in bid j. The decision variable x j denotes whether bid j wins (is accepted by the auctioneer) or looses (is not accepted by the auctioneer).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. P. C. Chu and J. E. Beasley. A genetic algorithm for the multidimensional knapsack problem. Journal of Heuristics, 4(1):63–86, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. J. E. Gallardo, C. Cotta, and A. J. Fernández. Solving the multidimensional knapsack problem using an evolutionary algorithm hybridized with branch and bound. In Proc. of IWINAC-2005:21–30, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Y. Guo, A. Lim, B. Rodrigues, and Y. Zhu. A non-exact approach and experiment studies on the combinatorial auction problem. In Proc. of HICSS-38:82–89, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  4. R. C. Holte. Combinatorial auctions, knapsack problems, and hill-climbing search. In E. Stroulia and S. Matwin, editors, Canadian Conference on AI:57–66. Springer, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  5. H. H. Hoos and C. Boutilier. Solving combinatorial auctions using stochastic local search. In Proc. of AAAI-00:22–29. AAAI, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  6. H. Kellerer, U. Pferschy, and D. Pisinger. Knapsack Problems. Springer, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  7. G. Raidl. Weight-codings in a genetic algorithm for the multiconstraint knapsack problem. In Proc. of CEC99:596–603. IEEE Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  8. G. Raidl and J. Gottlieb. Empirical analysis of locality, heritability and heuristic bias in evolutionary algorithms: A case study for the multidimensional knapsack problem. ECJ, 13(4):441–475, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  9. F. Rothlauf and D. E. Goldberg. Redundant representations in evolutionary computation. Evolutionary Computation, 11(4):381–415, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Y. Sakurai, M. Yokoo, and K. Kamei. An efficient approximate algorithm for winner determination in combinatorial auctions. InProc. of EC-00:30–37, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. Thiel and S. Voss. Some experiences on solving multiconstraint zero-one knapsack problems with genetic algorithms. INFOR, 32(4):226–242, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. Vasquez and J.-K. Hao. A hybrid approach for the multidimensional 0–1 knapsack problem. In Proc. of IJCAI-01:328–333, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  13. E. Zurel and N. Nisan. An efficient approximate allocation algorithm for combinatorial auctions. In Proc. of EC-01:125–136. ACM, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Pfeiffer, J., Rothlauf, F. (2008). Greedy Heuristics and Weight-Coded EAs for Multidimensional Knapsack Problems and Multi-Unit Combinatorial Auctions. In: Kalcsics, J., Nickel, S. (eds) Operations Research Proceedings 2007. Operations Research Proceedings, vol 2007. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77903-2_24

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics