Advertisement

On the Many-Objective Pickup and Delivery Problem: Analysis of the Performance of Three Evolutionary Algorithms

  • Abel García-NájeraEmail author
  • Antonio López-Jaimes
  • Saúl Zapotecas-Martínez
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10632)

Abstract

Many-objective optimization focuses on solving optimization problems with four or more objectives. Effort has been made mainly on studying continuous problems, with interesting results and for which several optimizers have been proposed. Nevertheless, combinatorial problems have not received as much attention, making this an open research area. An important result on continuous problems states that the problem does not necessarily becomes more difficult while more objectives are considered, but, does this result hold for combinatorial problems? This investigation takes this subject on by studying a many-objective combinatorial problem, particularly, the pickup and delivery problem (PDP), which is an important combinatorial optimization problem in the transportation industry and consists in finding a collection of routes with minimum cost. Traditionally, cost has been associated with the number of routes and the total travel distance, however, some other objectives emerge in many applications, for example, travel time, workload imbalance, and uncollected profit. If we consider all these objectives equally important, PDP can be tackled as a many-objective problem. This study is concerned with the study of the performance of three multi-objective evolutionary algorithms on the PDP varying the number of objectives, in order to analyze the change of PDP’s difficulty when the number of objectives is increased. Results show that the problem becomes more difficult to solve while more objectives are considered.

Keywords

Many-objective optimization Pickup and delivery problem Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms Combinatorial optimization 

References

  1. 1.
    Deb, K., Jain, H.: An evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm using reference-point-based nondominated sorting approach, Part I: solving problems with box constraints. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 18(4), 577–601 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Farina, M., Amato, P.: On the optimal solution definition for many-criteria optimization problems. In: NAFIPS-FLINT International Conference 2002, pp. 233–238. IEEE (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garcia-Najera, A., Gutierrez-Andrade, M.A.: An evolutionary approach to the multi-objective pickup and delivery problem with time windows. In: 2013 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 997–1004. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ishibuchi, H., Akedo, N., Nojima, Y.: Behavior of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms on many-objective knapsack problems. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 19(2), 264–283 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ishibuchi, H., Yamane, M., Nojima, Y.: Difficulty in evolutionary multiobjective optimization of discrete objective functions with different granularities. In: Purshouse, R.C., Fleming, P.J., Fonseca, C.M., Greco, S., Shaw, J. (eds.) EMO 2013. LNCS, vol. 7811, pp. 230–245. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37140-0_20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Laporte, G.: Fifty years of vehicle routing. Transport. Sci. 43(4), 408–416 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lenstra, J.K., Kan, A.H.G.R.: Complexity of vehicle routing and scheduling problems. Networks 11(2), 221–227 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li, H., Lim, A.: A metaheuristic for the pickup and delivery problem with time windows. In: 13th International Conference on Tools and Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1, pp. 160–167. IEEE Computer Society (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    López Jaimes, A., Coello Coello, C.A.: Many-objective problems: challenges and methods. In: Kacprzyk, J., Pedrycz, W. (eds.) Springer Handbook of Computational Intelligence, pp. 1033–1046. Springer, Heidelberg (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43505-2_51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    von Lücken, C., Barán, B., Brizuela, C.: A survey on multi-objective evolutionary algorithms for many-objective problems. Comput. Optim. Appl. 58(3), 707–756 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schütze, O., Lara, A., Coello Coello, C.A.: On the influence of the number of objectives on the hardness of a multiobjective optimization problem. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 15(4), 444–455 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang, Q., Li, H.: MOEA/D: a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 11(6), 712–731 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abel García-Nájera
    • 1
    Email author
  • Antonio López-Jaimes
    • 1
  • Saúl Zapotecas-Martínez
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Matemáticas Aplicadas y SistemasUniversidad Autónoma Metropolitana Unidad CuajimalpaCiudad de MéxicoMexico

Personalised recommendations