Improving Multi-actor Production, Inventory and Transportation Planning through Agent-Based Optimization

  • Johan HolmgrenEmail author
  • Jan A. Persson
  • Paul Davidsson
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 462)


We present an agent-based optimization approach that is built upon the principles of Dantzig-Wolfe column generation, which is a classic reformulation technique. We show how the approach can be used to optimize production, inventory, and transportation, which may result in improved planning for the involved supply chain actors. An important advantage is the possibility to keep information locally when possible, while still enabling global optimization of supply chain activities. In particular, the approach can be used as strategic decision support to show how the involved actors may benefit from applying Vendor Managed Inventory (VMI). In a case study, the approach has been applied to a real-world integrated production, inventory and routing problem, and the results from our experiments indicate that an increased number of VMI customers may give a significant reduction of the total cost in the system. Moreover, we analyze the communication overhead that is caused by using an agent-based, rather than a traditional (non agent-based) approach to decomposition, and some advantages and disadvantages are discussed.


Supply Chain Multiagent System Inventory Level Dual Variable Master Problem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Johnson, E., Whang, S.: E-business and supply chain management: An overview and framework. Production and Operations Management 11(4), 413–423 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dantzig, G., Wolfe, P.: The decomposition algorithm for linear programs. Econometrica 29, 767–778 (1961)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Daugherty, P.J., Myers, M.B., Autry, C.W.: Automatic replenishment programs: an empirical examination. Journal of Business Logistics 20(2), 63–82 (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karageorgos, A., Mehandjiev, N., Weichhart, G., Hämmerle, A.: Agent-based optimisation of logistics and production planning. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 16(4), 335–348 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dorer, K., Calisti, M.: An adaptive solution to dynamic transport optimization. In: AAMAS 2005: Proceedings of the Fourth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 45–51. ACM, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davidsson, P., Persson, J.A., Holmgren, J.: On the Integration of Agent-Based and Mathematical Optimization Techniques. In: Nguyen, N.T., Grzech, A., Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C. (eds.) KES-AMSTA 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4496, pp. 1–10. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Petcu, A.: A class of algorithms for distributed constraint optimization. Ph.D. thesis, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Geoffrion, A.M.: Lagrangean relaxation for integer programming. Mathematical Programming Study 2, 82–114 (1974)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Benders, J.: Partitioning procedures for solving mixed-variables programming problems. Numerische Mathematik 4, 238–252 (1962)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barnhart, C., Johnson, E.L., Nemhauser, G.L., Savelsbergh, M.W.P., Vance, P.H.: Branch-and-price: Column generation for solving huge integer programs. Operations Research 46, 316–329 (1998)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hirayama, K.: Distributed lagrangean relaxation protocol for the generalized mutual assignment problem. In: AAMAS 2006: Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 890–892. ACM, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Drexl, A., Kimms, A.: Lot sizing and scheduling - survey and extensions. European Journal of Operational Research 99, 221–235 (1997)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Toth, P., Vigo, D. (eds.): The Vehicle Routing Problem. SIAM monographs on discrete mathematics and applications, Philadelphia (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thomas, D.J., Griffin, P.M.: Coordinated supply chain management. European Journal of Operational Research 94, 1–15 (1996)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sarmiento, A.M., Nagi, R.: A review of integrated analysis of production-distribution systems. IIE Transactions 31, 1061–1074 (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Federgruen, A., Zipkin, P.: A combined vehicle and inventory routing allocation problem. Operations Research 32(5), 1019–1037 (1984)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chien, T.W., Balakrishnan, A., Wong, R.T.: An integrated inventory allocation and vehicle routing problem. Transportation Science 23(2), 67–76 (1989)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Campbell, A., Clarke, L., Kleywegt, A., Savelsbergh, M.: The inventory routing problem. In: Crainic, T.G., Laporte, G. (eds.) Fleet Management and Logistics, pp. 95–113. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chandra, P., Fisher, M.L.: Coordination of production and distribution planning. European Journal of Operational Research 72(3), 503–517 (1994)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lei, L., Liu, S., Ruszczynski, A., Park, S.: On the integrated production, inventory, and distribution routing problem. IIE Transactions 38(11), 955–970 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Persson, J.A., Göthe-Lundgren, M.: Shipment planning at oil refineries using column generation and valid inequalities. European Journal of Operational Research 163, 631–652 (2005)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bilgen, B., Ozkarahan, I.: A mixed-integer linear programming model for bulk grain blending and shipping. International Journal of Production Economics 107(2), 555–571 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fumero, F., Vercellis, C.: Synchronized development of production, inventory, and distribution schedules. Transportation Science 33(3), 330–340 (1999)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Davidsson, P., Holmgren, J., Persson, J.A., Ramstedt, L.: Multi agent based simulation of transport chains. In: AAMAS 2008: Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 1153–1160. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Richland (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sohier, E.: Modelling a complex production scheduling problem - optimization techniques. Master’s thesis, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bellifemine, F.L., Caire, G., Greenwood, D.: Developing Multi-Agent Systems with JADE. Wiley Series in Agent Technology. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johan Holmgren
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jan A. Persson
    • 1
  • Paul Davidsson
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.School of ComputingBlekinge Institute of TechnologyKarlshamnSweden
  2. 2.School of TechnologyMalmö UniversityMalmöSweden

Personalised recommendations