Incremental Local Search in Ant Colony Optimization: Why It Fails for the Quadratic Assignment Problem

  • Prasanna Balaprakash
  • Mauro Birattari
  • Thomas Stützle
  • Marco Dorigo
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4150)


Ant colony optimization algorithms are currently among the best performing algorithms for the quadratic assignment problem. These algorithms contain two main search procedures: solution construction by artificial ants and local search to improve the solutions constructed by the ants. Incremental local search is an approach that consists in re-optimizing partial solutions by a local search algorithm at regular intervals while constructing a complete solution. In this paper, we investigate the impact of adopting incremental local search in ant colony optimization to solve the quadratic assignment problem. Notwithstanding the promising results of incremental local search reported in the literature in a different context, the computational results of our new ACO algorithm are rather negative. We provide an empirical analysis that explains this failure.


Local Search Partial Solution Vehicle Route Problem Local Search Algorithm Quadratic Assignment Problem 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dorigo, M., Stützle, T.: Ant Colony Optimization. MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stützle, T., Hoos, H.: Stochastic Local Search: Foundations and Applications. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Russell, R.: Hybrid Heuristics for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows. Transportation Science 29, 156–166 (1995)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gendreau, M., Hertz, A., Laporte, G.: New Insertion and Postoptimization Procedures for the Traveling Salesman Problem. Operations Research 40(6) (1992)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gendreau, M., Hertz, A., Laporte, G.: A Tabu Search Heuristic for the Vehicle Routing Problem. Management Science 40, 1276–1290 (1994)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caseau, Y., Laburthe, F.: Heuristics for Large Constrained Vehicle Routing Problems. Journal of Heuristics 5(3), 281–303 (1999)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fleurent, C., Glover, F.: Improved Constructive Multistart Strategies for the Quadratic Assignment Problem Using Adaptive Memory. INFORMS Journal on Computing 11(2), 198–204 (1999)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stützle, T., Hoos, H.: \(\cal MAX\)\(\cal MIN\) Ant System. Future Generation Computer Systems 16(8), 889–914 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stützle, T., Dorigo, M.: ACO Algorithms for the Quadratic Assignment Problem. In: Corne, D., Dorigo, M., Glover, F. (eds.) New Ideas in Optimization, London, UK, pp. 33–50. McGraw-Hill, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Burkard, R., Karisch, S., Rendl, F.:
  11. 11.
    Stützle, T., Hoos, H.H.: Improving the Ant System: A Detailed Report on the \(\cal MAX\)\(\cal MIN\) Ant System. Technical Report AIDA–96–12, FG Intellektik, FB Informatik, TU Darmstadt (1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schiavinotto, T., Stützle, T.: Metrics on Permutations for Search Space Analysis. Computers & Operations Research (in press)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cohen, P.R.: Empirical Methods for Artificial Intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Prasanna Balaprakash
    • 1
  • Mauro Birattari
    • 1
  • Thomas Stützle
    • 1
  • Marco Dorigo
    • 1
  1. 1.IRIDIA, CoDEUniversité Libre de BruxellesBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations