Dynamic Matrix Factorization Methods for Using Formulations Derived From Higher Order Lifting Techniques in the Solution of the Quadratic Assignment Problem
This paper concerns the use of linear programming based methods for the exact solution of the Quadratic Assignment Problem (QAP). The primary obstacles facing such an approach are the large size of the formulation resulting from the linearization of the quadratic objective function and the poor quality of the lower bounds. Special purpose linear programming methods using dynamic matrix factorization provide a promising avenue for solving these large scale linear programs (LP). This enables a large portion of the LP basis to be represented implicitly and generated from the remaining explicit part. Computational results demonstrating the strength of this approach are also presented. For this approach to be effective in the solution of QAPs, dynamic matrix factorization should be combined with formulations that yield superior lower bounds. Lifting techniques have been theoretically proven to improve bound strength at the cost of a dramatic increase in formulation size. A formulation including third order interactions is derived using this methodology. However, degeneracy poses a significant problem in the solution of these linear programs. Incorporation of third order interaction costs in the objective function is proposed as a possible way to mitigate problems due to stalling. Computational results indicate that this formulation yields much stronger lower bounds than the currently best known lower bounds. Unifying these various observations, it is suggested that the development of specialized dual simplex algorithms using dynamic matrix factorization can provide a promising approach to overcome these barriers.
KeywordsQuadratic Assignment Problems Linear Programming Dynamic Matrix Factorization Lifting Techniques
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 6.Bokhari, S.H. (1987) Assignment Problems in Distributed and Parallel Computing, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.Google Scholar
- 23.Kaufman, L. and Broeckx, F. (1978) “An Algorithm for the Quadratic Assignment Problem using Bender’s Decomposition” Eur. J. Op. Res., 2, 204–211.Google Scholar
- 32.Mirchandani, P.B., and Obata, T. (1979) “Locational Decisions with Interactions Between Facilities: The Quadratic Assignment Problem — A Review”, Working Paper PS-79-1, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, TVoy, New York.Google Scholar
- 33.Pardalos, P.M. and Crouse, J.V. (1989) “A Parallel Algorithm for the Quadratic Assignment Problem”, Proc. Supercomputing ’89, 351–360.Google Scholar
- 35.Pollatschek, M.A., Gershoni, H. and Radday, Y.T. (1976) “Optimization of the Typewriter Keyboard by Computer Simulation”, Angewandte Informatik, 10, 438–439.Google Scholar
- 36.Powell, S. (1975) “A Development of the Product Form Algorithm for the Simplex Method using Reduced Transformation Vectors”, Math. Prog. Study, 4, 93–107.Google Scholar
- 37.QAPLIB — A Quadratic Assignment Problem Library February 1994. (Available by ftp at ftp.tu-graz.ac.at).Google Scholar
- 38.Ramachandran, B. and Pekny, J.F. (1994) “An Approach Based on Combinatorial Optimization Guarantees For the Determination of a Global Minimum on a Lattice”, Submitted to Biopolymers.Google Scholar
- 39.Ramachandran, B. and Pekny, J.F. (1995) “Lower Bounds for Nonlinear Assignment Problems using Many Body Interactions”, Submitted to Discrete Applied Mathematics.Google Scholar
- 40.Resende, M.G.C., Ramakrishnan, K.G. and Dresner, Z. (1994) “Computing Lower Bounds for the Quadratic Assignment Problem with an Interior Point Algorithm for Linear Programming”, Technical Report, Mathematical Sciences Research Center, AT & T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, New Jersey.Google Scholar