Advertisement

Hyper-Heuristics: An Emerging Direction in Modern Search Technology

  • Edmund Burke
  • Graham Kendall
  • Jim Newall
  • Emma Hart
  • Peter Ross
  • Sonia Schulenburg
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 57)

Abstract

This chapter introduces and overviews an emerging methodology in search and optimisation. One of the key aims of these new approaches, which have been termed hyperheuristics, is to raise the level of generality at which optimisation systems can operate. An objective is that hyper-heuristics will lead to more general systems that are able to handle a wide range of problem domains rather than current meta-heuristic technology which tends to be customised to a particular problem or a narrow class of problems. Hyper-heuristics are broadly concerned with intelligently choosing the right heuristic or algorithm in a given situation. Of course, a hyper-heuristic can be (often is) a (meta-)heuristic and it can operate on (meta-)heuristics. In a certain sense, a hyper-heuristic works at a higher level when compared with the typical application of meta-heuristics to optimisation problems, i.e., a hyper-heuristic could be thought of as a (meta)-heuristic which operates on lower level (meta-)heuristics. In this chapter we will introduce the idea and give a brief history of this emerging area. In addition, we will review some of the latest work to be published in the field.

Keywords

Hyper-heuristic Meta-heuristic Heuristic Optimisation Search 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    P. Ross, E. Hart and D. Corne (1997) Some observations about GA-based exam timetabling. In: E.K. Burke and M. Carter (eds.), LNCS 1408, Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling II: Second International Conference, PATAT 1997, Toronto, Canada, selected papers. Springer-Verlag, pp. 115–129.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    H.-L. Fang, P.M. Ross and D. Corne (1994) A promising hybrid GA/heuristic approach for open-shop scheduling problems. In: A. Cohn (ed.), Proceedings of ECAI 94: 11th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, pp. 590–594.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    E.K. Burke, B.L. MacCarthy, S. Petrovic and R. Qu (2002) Knowledge discovery in a hyper-heuristic for course timetabling using case based reasoning. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT’02), Ghent, Belgium (to appear).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    S. Petrovic and R. Qu (2002) Case-Based Reasoning as a Heuristic Selector in a Hyper-Heuristic for Course Timetabling. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems (KES’2002), Crema, Italy (to appear).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    D. Wolpert and W.G. MacReady (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    D.S. Johnson (1973) Near-optimal Bin-packing Algorithms. Ph.D. thesis. MIT Department of Mathematics, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    E.G. Coffman, M.R. Garey and D.S. Johnson (1996) Approximation algorithms for bin packing: a survey. In: D. Hochbaum (ed.), Approximation Algorithms for NP-Hard Problems. PWS Publishing, Boston, pp. 46–93.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    P.A. Djang and P.R. Finch. Solving one dimensional bin packing problems. Available as http://www.zianet.com/pdjang/binpack/paper.zip.
  9. [9]
    I.P. Gent (1998) Heuristic solution of open bin packing problems. Journal of Heuristics, 3(4), 299–304.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    L.S. Pitsoulis and M.G.C. Resende (2001) Greedy randomized adaptive search procedures. In: P.M. Pardalos and M.G.C. Resende (eds.), Handbook of Applied Optimization. OUP, pp. 168–181.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    S.E. Cross and E. Walker (1994) Dart: applying knowledge-based planning and scheduling to crisis action planning. In: M. Zweben and M.S. Fox (eds.), Intelligent Scheduling. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. Minton (1998) Learning Search Control Knowledge: An Explanation-based Approach. Kluwer.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J. Gratch, S. Chein and G. de Jong (1993) Learning search control knowledge for deep space network scheduling. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Machine Learning. pp. 135–142.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    J.D. Schaffer (1996) Combinatorial optimization by genetic algorithms: the value of the phenotype/genotype distinction. In: E.D. Goodman, V.L. Uskov, W.F. Punch III (eds.), First International Conference on Evolutionary Computing and its Applications (EvCA’96), Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia, June 24–27, Institute for High Performance Computer Systems of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia, pp. 110–120.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    E. Hart and P.M. Ross (1998) A heuristic combination method for solving job-shop scheduling problems. In: A.E. Eiben, T. Back, M. Schoenauer and H.-P. Schwefel (eds.), Parallel Problem Solving from Nature V, LNCS 1498, Springer-Verlag, pp. 845–854.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    B. Giffler and G.L. Thompson (1960) Algorithms for solving production scheduling problems. Operations Research, 8(4), 487–503.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    E. Hart, P.M. Ross and J. Nelson (1998) Solving a real-world problem using an evolving heuristically driven schedule builder. Evolutionary Computation, 6(1), 61–80.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    H. Terashima-Marín, P.M. Ross and M. Valenzuela-Rendón (1999) Evolution of constraint satisfaction strategies in examination timetabling. In: W. Banzhaf et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the GECCO-99 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 635–642.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    P. Cowling, G. Kendall and E. Soubeiga (2002) Hyperheuristics: a robust optimisation method applied to nurse scheduling. Technical Report NOTTCS-TR-2002-6 (submitted to PPSN 2002 Conference), University of Nottingham, UK, School of Computer Science & IT.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    L. Han, G. Kendall and P. Cowling (2002) An adaptive length chromosome hyperheuristic genetic algorithm for a trainer scheduling problem. Technical Report NOTTCS-TR-2002-5 (submitted to SEAL 2002 Conference), University of Nottingham, UK, School of Computer Science & IT.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    P. Ross, S. Schulenburg, J.G. Marín-Blázquez and E. Hart (2002) Hyperheuristics: learning to combine simple heuristics in bin-packing problems. Accepted for Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO 20020) 2002, July 9–13, New York.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    S. Wilson (1998) Generalisation in the XCS classifier system. In: J. Koza (ed.), Proceedings of the Third Genetic Programming Conference. Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 665–674.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    S. Schulenburg, P. Ross, J.G. Marín-Blázquez and E. Hart. A hyper-heuristic approach to single and multiple step environments in bin-packing problems. Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Learning Classifier Systems 2002 (IWLCS-02) (to appear).Google Scholar
  24. [24]
  25. [25]
    P. Cowling, G. Kendall, E. Soubeiga (2000) A hyperheuristic approach to scheduling a sales summit. In: E.K. Burke and W. Erben (eds.), LNCS2079, Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling III: Third International Conference, PATAT 2000, Konstanz, Germany, August, selected papers, Springer-Verlag, pp. 176–190.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    P. Cowling, G. Kendall and E. Soubeiga (2001) A parameter-free hyperheuristic for scheduling a sales summit. In: Proceedings of 4th Metahuristics International Conference (MIC 2001), Porto Portugal, 16–20 July, pp. 127–131.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    P. Cowling, G. Kendall and E. Soubeiga (2002) Hyperheuristics: a tool for rapid prototyping in scheduling and optimisation. In: S. Cagoni, J. Gottlieb, E. Hart, M. Middendorf and R. Günther (eds.), LNCS 2279, Applications of Evolutionary Computing: Proceedings ofEvo Workshops 2002, Kinsale, Ireland, April 3–4, ISSN 0302-9743, ISBN 3-540-43432-1, Springer-Verlag, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    P. Cowling, G. Kendal and L. Han (2002) An investigation of a hyperheuristic genetic algorithm applied to a trainer scheduling problem. In: Proceedings of Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC2002), Hilton Hawaiian Village Hotel, Honolulu, Hawaii, May 12–17, pp. 1185–1190, ISBN 0-7803-7282-4.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    E.K. Burke and J.P. Newall (2002) A new adaptive heuristic framework for examination timetabling problems. Technical Report NOTTCS-TR-2001-5 (submitted to Annals of Operations Research), University of Nottingham, UK, School of Computer Science & IT.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    D.E. Joslin and D.P. Clements (1999) Squeaky wheel optimization. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 10, 353–373.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    B. Selman and H. Kautz (1993) Domain-independent extensions to GSAT: Solving large structured satisfiability problems. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 290–295.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    E.K. Burke and S. Petrovic (2002) Recent Research Directions in Automated Timetabling. European Journal of Operational Research (to appear).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edmund Burke
    • 1
  • Graham Kendall
    • 1
  • Jim Newall
    • 1
  • Emma Hart
    • 2
  • Peter Ross
    • 2
  • Sonia Schulenburg
    • 2
  1. 1.The University of NottinghamUK
  2. 2.Napier UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations