• Previous Article
    Linear bilevel multiobjective optimization problem: Penalty approach
  • JIMO Home
  • This Issue
  • Next Article
    The optimal pricing and ordering policy for temperature sensitive products considering the effects of temperature on demand
July  2019, 15(3): 1185-1211. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018091

Maritime inventory routing problem with multiple time windows

1. 

Department of Industrial Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya 60111, Indonesia

2. 

School of Engineering and Information Technology, University of New South Wales, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia

* Corresponding author: Nurhadi Siswanto

Received  May 2017 Revised  February 2018 Published  July 2019 Early access  July 2018

Fund Project: The first author is supported by Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education, Republic of Indonesia through International Research Collaboration and Scientific Publication Research Grant No. 536/PKS/ITS/2017.

This paper considers a maritime inventory routing problem with multiple time windows. The typical time windows considered that certain ports permit ships entering and leaving during the daytime only due to various operational limitations. We have developed an exact algorithm to represent this problem. However, due to the excessive computational time required for solving the model, we have proposed a multi-heuristics based genetic algorithm. The multi-heuristics are composed of a set of strategies that correspond to four decision points: ship selection, ship routing, the product type and the quantity of loading and unloading products. The experimental results show that the multi-heuristics can obtain acceptable solutions within a reasonable computational time. Moreover, the flexibility to add or remove the strategies means that the proposed method would not be difficult to implement for other variants of the maritime inventory routing problem.

Citation: Nurhadi Siswanto, Stefanus Eko Wiratno, Ahmad Rusdiansyah, Ruhul Sarker. Maritime inventory routing problem with multiple time windows. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (3) : 1185-1211. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018091
References:
[1]

A. Agra, M. Christiansen, et al., A maritime inventory routing problem with stochastic sailing and port times, Computers & Operations Research, 61 (2015), 18-30 doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2015.01.008.

[2]

F. Al-Khayyal and S. J. Hwang, Discrete Optimization-Inventory constrained maritime routing and scheduling for multi-commodity liquid bulk, Part Ⅰ: Applications and model, European Journal of Operational Research, 176 (2007), 106-130.  doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2005.06.047.

[3]

K. Chakhlevitch and P. Cowling, Hyperheuristics: Recent developments, in Adaptive and Multilevel Metaheuristics (eds. C. Cotta, M. Sevaux, K. Sorensen), Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, (2008), 3-29

[4]

M. Christiansen and B. Nygreen, A method for solving ship routing problems with inventory constraints, Annals of Operations Research, 81 (1998), 357-378.  doi: 10.1023/A:1018921527269.

[5]

M. Christiansen and B. Nygreen, Modeling path flows for a combined ship routing and inventory management problem, Annals of Operations Research, 82 (1998), 391-412.  doi: 10.1023/A:1018979107222.

[6]

M. Christiansen, Decomposition of a combined inventory and time constrained ship routing problem, Transportation Science, 33 (1999), 3-16.  doi: 10.1287/trsc.33.1.3.

[7]

M. Christiansen and K. Fagerholt, Robust ship scheduling with multiple time windows, Naval Research Logistics, 49 (2002), 611-625.  doi: 10.1002/nav.10033.

[8]

M. ChristiansenK. FagerholtB. Nygreen and D. Ronen, Chapter 4 maritime transportation in handbooks in operations research and management science, (eds, C. Barnhart, G. Laporte), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 14 (2007), 189-284. 

[9]

M. Christiansen and K. Fagerholt, Maritime inventory routing problems, in Encyclopedia of Optimization, Second edition (eds C. A. Floudas, P. M. Pardalos), Springer-Verlag, (2009), 1947-1955

[10]

M. ChristiansenK. FagerholtT. FlatbergØ. HaugenO. Kloster and E. H. Lund, Maritime inventory routing with multiple products: A case study from the cement industry, European Journal of Operational Research, 208 (2011), 86-94.  doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2010.08.023.

[11]

K. F. DoernerM. GronaltR. F. HartlG. Kiechle and M. Reimann, Exact and heuristic algorithms for the vehicle routing problem with multiple interdependent time windows, Computers and Operations Research, 35 (2008), 3034-3048.  doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2007.02.012.

[12]

D. FavarettoE. Moretti and P. Pellegrini, Ant colony system for a VRP with multiple time windows and multiple visits, Journal of Interdisciplinary Mathematics, 10 (2007), 263-284.  doi: 10.1080/09720502.2007.10700491.

[13]

K. C. FurmanJ. H. SongG. R. KocisM. K. McDonald and P. H. Warrick, Feedstock routing in the exxonmobil downstream sector, Interfaces, 41 (2011), 149-163.  doi: 10.1287/inte.1100.0508.

[14]

A. Hemmati, L. M. Hvattum, et al., An iterative two-phase hybrid matheuristic for a multiproduct short sea inventory-routing problem, European Journal of Operational Research, 252 (2016), 775-788 doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.01.060.

[15]

S. J. Hwang, Inventory Constrained Maritime Routing and Scheduling for Multi-Commodity Liquid Bulk, Dissertation, School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA, 2005.

[16]

Y. Jiang and I. E. Grossmann, Alternative mixed-integer linear programming models of a maritime inventory routing problem, Computers & Chemical Engineering, 77 (2015), 147-161.  doi: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2015.03.005.

[17]

J. Lee and B. I. Kim, Industrial ship routing problem with split delivery and two types of vessels, Expert Systems with Applications, 42 (2015), 9012-9023.  doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2015.07.059.

[18]

D. J. PapageorgiouG. L. NemhauserJ. SokolM. S. Cheon and A. B. Keha, MIRPLib - A library of maritime inventory routing problem instances: Survey, core model, and benchmark results, European Journal of Operational Research, 235 (2014), 350-366.  doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2013.12.013.

[19]

D. J. Papageorgiou and A. B. Keha, et al., Two-stage decomposition algorithms for single product maritime inventory routing, INFORMS Journal on Computing, 26 (2014), 825-847 doi: 10.1287/ijoc.2014.0601.

[20]

V. Rodrigues and R. Morabito, et al., Ship routing with pickup and delivery for a maritime oil transportation system: MIP model and heuristics, Systems, 4 (2016), p31.

[21]

B. Santosa and R. Damayanti, et al., Solving multi-product inventory ship routing with a heterogeneous fleet model using a hybrid cross entropy-genetic algorithm: a case study in Indonesia, Production & Manufacturing Research, 4 (2016), 90-113 doi: 10.1080/21693277.2016.1204961.

[22]

M. Savelsbergh and J. H. Song, Inventory routing with continuous moves, Computers and Operations Research, 34 (2007), 1744-1763.  doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2005.05.036.

[23]

N. SiswantoD. Essam and R. Sarker, Solving the ship inventory routing and scheduling problem with undedicated compartments, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 61 (2011), 289-299.  doi: 10.1109/ICCIE.2009.5223771.

[24]

N. Siswanto, D. Essam and R. Sarker, Multi-heuristics based genetic algorithm for solving maritime inventory routing problem, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Singapore, (2011), 116-120 doi: 10.1109/IEEM.2011.6117890.

[25]

J. Sokol, C. Zhang, G. Nemhauser, D. Papageorgiou and M. S. Cheon, Robust inventory routing with flexible time window allocation, Working paper, 2015.

[26]

J. H. Song and K. C. Furman, A maritime inventory routing problem: Practical approach, Computers and Operations Research, 40 (2011), 657-665.  doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2010.10.031.

[27]

F. TricoireM. RomauchK. F. Doerner and R. F. Hartl, Heuristics for the multi-period orienteering problem with multiple time windows, Computers and Operations Research, 37 (2010), 351-367.  doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2009.05.012.

show all references

References:
[1]

A. Agra, M. Christiansen, et al., A maritime inventory routing problem with stochastic sailing and port times, Computers & Operations Research, 61 (2015), 18-30 doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2015.01.008.

[2]

F. Al-Khayyal and S. J. Hwang, Discrete Optimization-Inventory constrained maritime routing and scheduling for multi-commodity liquid bulk, Part Ⅰ: Applications and model, European Journal of Operational Research, 176 (2007), 106-130.  doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2005.06.047.

[3]

K. Chakhlevitch and P. Cowling, Hyperheuristics: Recent developments, in Adaptive and Multilevel Metaheuristics (eds. C. Cotta, M. Sevaux, K. Sorensen), Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, (2008), 3-29

[4]

M. Christiansen and B. Nygreen, A method for solving ship routing problems with inventory constraints, Annals of Operations Research, 81 (1998), 357-378.  doi: 10.1023/A:1018921527269.

[5]

M. Christiansen and B. Nygreen, Modeling path flows for a combined ship routing and inventory management problem, Annals of Operations Research, 82 (1998), 391-412.  doi: 10.1023/A:1018979107222.

[6]

M. Christiansen, Decomposition of a combined inventory and time constrained ship routing problem, Transportation Science, 33 (1999), 3-16.  doi: 10.1287/trsc.33.1.3.

[7]

M. Christiansen and K. Fagerholt, Robust ship scheduling with multiple time windows, Naval Research Logistics, 49 (2002), 611-625.  doi: 10.1002/nav.10033.

[8]

M. ChristiansenK. FagerholtB. Nygreen and D. Ronen, Chapter 4 maritime transportation in handbooks in operations research and management science, (eds, C. Barnhart, G. Laporte), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 14 (2007), 189-284. 

[9]

M. Christiansen and K. Fagerholt, Maritime inventory routing problems, in Encyclopedia of Optimization, Second edition (eds C. A. Floudas, P. M. Pardalos), Springer-Verlag, (2009), 1947-1955

[10]

M. ChristiansenK. FagerholtT. FlatbergØ. HaugenO. Kloster and E. H. Lund, Maritime inventory routing with multiple products: A case study from the cement industry, European Journal of Operational Research, 208 (2011), 86-94.  doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2010.08.023.

[11]

K. F. DoernerM. GronaltR. F. HartlG. Kiechle and M. Reimann, Exact and heuristic algorithms for the vehicle routing problem with multiple interdependent time windows, Computers and Operations Research, 35 (2008), 3034-3048.  doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2007.02.012.

[12]

D. FavarettoE. Moretti and P. Pellegrini, Ant colony system for a VRP with multiple time windows and multiple visits, Journal of Interdisciplinary Mathematics, 10 (2007), 263-284.  doi: 10.1080/09720502.2007.10700491.

[13]

K. C. FurmanJ. H. SongG. R. KocisM. K. McDonald and P. H. Warrick, Feedstock routing in the exxonmobil downstream sector, Interfaces, 41 (2011), 149-163.  doi: 10.1287/inte.1100.0508.

[14]

A. Hemmati, L. M. Hvattum, et al., An iterative two-phase hybrid matheuristic for a multiproduct short sea inventory-routing problem, European Journal of Operational Research, 252 (2016), 775-788 doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.01.060.

[15]

S. J. Hwang, Inventory Constrained Maritime Routing and Scheduling for Multi-Commodity Liquid Bulk, Dissertation, School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA, 2005.

[16]

Y. Jiang and I. E. Grossmann, Alternative mixed-integer linear programming models of a maritime inventory routing problem, Computers & Chemical Engineering, 77 (2015), 147-161.  doi: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2015.03.005.

[17]

J. Lee and B. I. Kim, Industrial ship routing problem with split delivery and two types of vessels, Expert Systems with Applications, 42 (2015), 9012-9023.  doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2015.07.059.

[18]

D. J. PapageorgiouG. L. NemhauserJ. SokolM. S. Cheon and A. B. Keha, MIRPLib - A library of maritime inventory routing problem instances: Survey, core model, and benchmark results, European Journal of Operational Research, 235 (2014), 350-366.  doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2013.12.013.

[19]

D. J. Papageorgiou and A. B. Keha, et al., Two-stage decomposition algorithms for single product maritime inventory routing, INFORMS Journal on Computing, 26 (2014), 825-847 doi: 10.1287/ijoc.2014.0601.

[20]

V. Rodrigues and R. Morabito, et al., Ship routing with pickup and delivery for a maritime oil transportation system: MIP model and heuristics, Systems, 4 (2016), p31.

[21]

B. Santosa and R. Damayanti, et al., Solving multi-product inventory ship routing with a heterogeneous fleet model using a hybrid cross entropy-genetic algorithm: a case study in Indonesia, Production & Manufacturing Research, 4 (2016), 90-113 doi: 10.1080/21693277.2016.1204961.

[22]

M. Savelsbergh and J. H. Song, Inventory routing with continuous moves, Computers and Operations Research, 34 (2007), 1744-1763.  doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2005.05.036.

[23]

N. SiswantoD. Essam and R. Sarker, Solving the ship inventory routing and scheduling problem with undedicated compartments, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 61 (2011), 289-299.  doi: 10.1109/ICCIE.2009.5223771.

[24]

N. Siswanto, D. Essam and R. Sarker, Multi-heuristics based genetic algorithm for solving maritime inventory routing problem, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Singapore, (2011), 116-120 doi: 10.1109/IEEM.2011.6117890.

[25]

J. Sokol, C. Zhang, G. Nemhauser, D. Papageorgiou and M. S. Cheon, Robust inventory routing with flexible time window allocation, Working paper, 2015.

[26]

J. H. Song and K. C. Furman, A maritime inventory routing problem: Practical approach, Computers and Operations Research, 40 (2011), 657-665.  doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2010.10.031.

[27]

F. TricoireM. RomauchK. F. Doerner and R. F. Hartl, Heuristics for the multi-period orienteering problem with multiple time windows, Computers and Operations Research, 37 (2010), 351-367.  doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2009.05.012.

Figure 1.  Loading and unloading activities at a port
Figure 2.  Daily multiple time windows at a port
Figure 3.  Detailed activities of a ship during its time in a port
Figure 4.  Several alternatives of a ship arriving and leaving a port when considering time windows
Figure 5.  An Example of Chromosome
Figure 6.  Chromosome in one and two steps
Figure 7.  Changing states during every assignment in a chromosome
Figure 8.  The values of the fitness functions for test problem 1 with the 15 day planning horizon from each of 40 runs
Table 1.  An example of strategies for each decision point
No Decision point Strategies
1 Ship selection Based on the least ships current time
2 Routing Visit two demand ports with the sequence based on the least CDik
3 Loading Compartment [1] for product[1], compartment[2] for product[2] with loading quantities up to the maximum of compartments capacities
4 Unloading Divide the same quantities for both ports
No Decision point Strategies
1 Ship selection Based on the least ships current time
2 Routing Visit two demand ports with the sequence based on the least CDik
3 Loading Compartment [1] for product[1], compartment[2] for product[2] with loading quantities up to the maximum of compartments capacities
4 Unloading Divide the same quantities for both ports
Table 2.  Data of port and their storages
No Description H1 H2 H3
S11 S12 S21 S22 S31 S32
1 Maximum capacity (unit) 160 180 55 41 68 51
2 Minimum level (unit) 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 Initial level (unit) 44 28 19 27 46 25
4 Daily supply/demand rate (unit/day) 8 9 6 4 2 5
5 Fixed setup loading time (day) 0.039 0.059 0.074 0.060 0.067 0.049
6 Variable loading time (day/unit) 0.025 0.010 0.003 0.026 0.028 0.014
7 Fixed setup loading cost ($) 10 8 6 9 8 10
8 Variable loading cost ($/unit) 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 Quantity penalty cost ($/day) 10 10 10 10 10 10
10 Fixed setup port time (day) 0 0 0
11 Fixed setup port cost ($) 0 0 0
12 Daily starting time windows 7.12am 7.12am 7.12am
13 Daily ending time windows 4.48pm 4.48am 4.48pm
No Description H1 H2 H3
S11 S12 S21 S22 S31 S32
1 Maximum capacity (unit) 160 180 55 41 68 51
2 Minimum level (unit) 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 Initial level (unit) 44 28 19 27 46 25
4 Daily supply/demand rate (unit/day) 8 9 6 4 2 5
5 Fixed setup loading time (day) 0.039 0.059 0.074 0.060 0.067 0.049
6 Variable loading time (day/unit) 0.025 0.010 0.003 0.026 0.028 0.014
7 Fixed setup loading cost ($) 10 8 6 9 8 10
8 Variable loading cost ($/unit) 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 Quantity penalty cost ($/day) 10 10 10 10 10 10
10 Fixed setup port time (day) 0 0 0
11 Fixed setup port cost ($) 0 0 0
12 Daily starting time windows 7.12am 7.12am 7.12am
13 Daily ending time windows 4.48pm 4.48am 4.48pm
Table 3.  Data of ship and their compartments
No Description V1 V2
C11 C12 C21 C22
1 Maximum compartment capacity 68 31 44 50
2 Initial level 0 0 40 4
3 Current product in the compartment - - P2 P1
No Description V1 V2
C11 C12 C21 C22
1 Maximum compartment capacity 68 31 44 50
2 Initial level 0 0 40 4
3 Current product in the compartment - - P2 P1
Table 4.  Data of travelling cost and time between ports
Table 5.  The result of exact algorithm solved using Lingo
Test Problem (TP) Planning Horizon (PH) Scenario 1 (Mp=3;Mc=2) Scenario 2 (Mp=3;Mc=2) Gap (%)
Optimal Solution Run Time (in Second) Optimal Solution Run Time (in Second)
1 10 55.8 1,329 - ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(*) -
15 91.4 21,423 - ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(*) -
2 10 66.8 1,012 66.8 582 0
15 103, 0 25,451 103.0 74,166 0
3 10 99.0 46 - ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(*) -
15 216.0 34,827 - ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(*) -
4 10 137.0 640 137.0 211 0
15 265.0 47,210 265.0 ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(n) 0
(n)the solution did not terminate before the time limit of 8.64E+4 seconds (24 hours)
(*)a feasible solution was not obtained before the time limit of 8.64E+4 seconds (24 hours)
Test Problem (TP) Planning Horizon (PH) Scenario 1 (Mp=3;Mc=2) Scenario 2 (Mp=3;Mc=2) Gap (%)
Optimal Solution Run Time (in Second) Optimal Solution Run Time (in Second)
1 10 55.8 1,329 - ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(*) -
15 91.4 21,423 - ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(*) -
2 10 66.8 1,012 66.8 582 0
15 103, 0 25,451 103.0 74,166 0
3 10 99.0 46 - ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(*) -
15 216.0 34,827 - ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(*) -
4 10 137.0 640 137.0 211 0
15 265.0 47,210 265.0 ﹥﹥8.64E + 4(n) 0
(n)the solution did not terminate before the time limit of 8.64E+4 seconds (24 hours)
(*)a feasible solution was not obtained before the time limit of 8.64E+4 seconds (24 hours)
Table 6.  The sequence of visiting demand ports
Gene4 Gene3 The first visiting port The second visiting port
0 0 CDP[0]
1 CDP[0] CDP[1]
1 0 CDP[1]
1 CDP[1] CDP[0]
Gene4 Gene3 The first visiting port The second visiting port
0 0 CDP[0]
1 CDP[0] CDP[1]
1 0 CDP[1]
1 CDP[1] CDP[0]
Table 7.  An example of one ship's assignment output
(A) Determining loading and unloading quantities
Product # Quantity in supply port at the time a ship arrive(*) Remaining demands(*) Compartment Capacity(*) Loading Quantity(*) Unload for the first visited port(*) Unload for the second visited port(*)
P1 40.8 28.6 44.0 28.6 0.0 28.6
P1 50.4 43.8 50.0 43.8 16.0 27.8
(*) in product units
(B) Routing and schedule of the selected ship
Source Port Departure Destination Port Port's last visit Arrival Waiting time to enter(n) Lay time
Date Time Date Time Date Time Date Time
H3 May 11 2.24pm H1 May 7 7.12am May 12 9.36am 0:00 May 12 9.36am
H1 May 13 3.37pm H3 May 11 2.24am May 14 10.49am 0:00 May 14 10.49am
H3 May 15 7.12am H2 May 11 7.12am May 16 7.12am 0:00 May 16 7.12am
(n) in (hour:minutes)
(C) Routing and schedule of the selected ship (continue)
Destination Port Loading Time(n) Waiting time for supply/space(n) Ready to Leave Waiting time to leave(n) Leaving time
Date Time Date Time
H1 30:01 0:00 May 13 3.37pm 0:00 May 13 3.37pm
H3 6:33 0:00 May 14 7.12pm 12:00 May 15 7.12am
H2 22:38 0:00 May 17 5.50am 1:22 May 17 7.12am
(n) in (hour:minutes)
(D) Information of each visiting port's storage
Destination Port Product# CDik Remaining Demand(*) Level of Storages(*) at ship's lay time Available space in storage(*) Loading/Unloading quantity(*)
H1 P1 27.30 0.0 40.8 - 28.6
H1 P2 26.80 0.0 50.4 - 43.8
H3 P1 25.00 0.0 21.1 46.9 0.0
H3 P2 21.80 16.0 36.7 14.3 16.0
H2 P1 20.23 28.6 23.6 31.4 28.6
H2 P2 18.05 27.8 7.0 34.0 27.8
(*) in product units
(A) Determining loading and unloading quantities
Product # Quantity in supply port at the time a ship arrive(*) Remaining demands(*) Compartment Capacity(*) Loading Quantity(*) Unload for the first visited port(*) Unload for the second visited port(*)
P1 40.8 28.6 44.0 28.6 0.0 28.6
P1 50.4 43.8 50.0 43.8 16.0 27.8
(*) in product units
(B) Routing and schedule of the selected ship
Source Port Departure Destination Port Port's last visit Arrival Waiting time to enter(n) Lay time
Date Time Date Time Date Time Date Time
H3 May 11 2.24pm H1 May 7 7.12am May 12 9.36am 0:00 May 12 9.36am
H1 May 13 3.37pm H3 May 11 2.24am May 14 10.49am 0:00 May 14 10.49am
H3 May 15 7.12am H2 May 11 7.12am May 16 7.12am 0:00 May 16 7.12am
(n) in (hour:minutes)
(C) Routing and schedule of the selected ship (continue)
Destination Port Loading Time(n) Waiting time for supply/space(n) Ready to Leave Waiting time to leave(n) Leaving time
Date Time Date Time
H1 30:01 0:00 May 13 3.37pm 0:00 May 13 3.37pm
H3 6:33 0:00 May 14 7.12pm 12:00 May 15 7.12am
H2 22:38 0:00 May 17 5.50am 1:22 May 17 7.12am
(n) in (hour:minutes)
(D) Information of each visiting port's storage
Destination Port Product# CDik Remaining Demand(*) Level of Storages(*) at ship's lay time Available space in storage(*) Loading/Unloading quantity(*)
H1 P1 27.30 0.0 40.8 - 28.6
H1 P2 26.80 0.0 50.4 - 43.8
H3 P1 25.00 0.0 21.1 46.9 0.0
H3 P2 21.80 16.0 36.7 14.3 16.0
H2 P1 20.23 28.6 23.6 31.4 28.6
H2 P2 18.05 27.8 7.0 34.0 27.8
(*) in product units
Table Appendix A.  The results of the multi-heuristics based GA in comparison to the results of the exact algorithm
Test Problem (TP) Planning Horizon (PH) Exact Algorithm Solution Multi-Heuristics based GA (40 runs repetition)
No. of Individuals in a population Best Solution (Min) Gap (%) Max. Solution Average Standart Deviation No. of infeasible solutions Average Running Time (in 2nd)
11055.82055.8055.855.80050.3
5055.8055.855.800105.6
10055.8055.855.800222.7
1591.42091.40108.794.35.40166.0
5091.40102.091.92.00401.2
10091.4091.491.400879.0
20$(*)$20107.7-148.0126.99.30248.5
50107.7-135.0122.27.10626.0
100107.7-122.4116.03.701,312.0
25$(*)$20146.3-196.9175.414.75234.9
50140.8-195.4165.315.92774.2
100143.4-188.7154.410.501,824.1
21066.82066.8076.868.43.6093.08
5066.8068.666.90.20212.9
10066.8066.866.800497.1
15103.020109.36.12140.2125.66.40197.3
50103.00130.5120.26.50535.2
100105.22.14124.2116.64.401,207.4
20$(*)$20149.7-191.8170.39.83208.3
50142.3-184.0166.27.55694.3
100149.7-191.0163.710.431,520.2
25$(*)$20177.5-231.2202.812.512295.8
50171.6-207.3190.910.46938.4
100173.6-208.7187.08.641,771.2
31099.02099.0099.099.00043.9
5099.0099.099.000109.0
10099.0099.099.000239.9
15216.020216.00241.0222.45.00147.0
50216.00241.0220.14.80377.2
100216.00221.0217.42.30796.1
20$(*)$20306.0-423.0343.625.10184.0
50304.0-344.0316.511.350585.2
100304.0-401.0312.016.001,222.6
25$(*)$20401.0-508.0466.824.41236.7
50346.0-522.0422.546.22753.3
100346.0-483.0404.841.601,476.9
410137.020137.00147.0140.04.6084.7
50137.00137.0137.000180.4
100137.00137.0137.000406.6
15265.020277.04.53363.0291.614.60196.3
50275.03.77294.0284.65.40530.0
100265.00287.0281.44.801,294.4
20$(*)$20354.0-479.0423.724.71217.5
50407.0-454.0423.215.25676.3
100350.0-454.0396.329.501,498.9
25$(*)$20484.0-632.0543.231.914304.6
50431.0-567.0517.934.37894.2
100431.0-558.0505.331.861,818.1
Note: (*) a feasible solution was not found before the time limit of 8.64E+4 seconds (24 hours)
Test Problem (TP) Planning Horizon (PH) Exact Algorithm Solution Multi-Heuristics based GA (40 runs repetition)
No. of Individuals in a population Best Solution (Min) Gap (%) Max. Solution Average Standart Deviation No. of infeasible solutions Average Running Time (in 2nd)
11055.82055.8055.855.80050.3
5055.8055.855.800105.6
10055.8055.855.800222.7
1591.42091.40108.794.35.40166.0
5091.40102.091.92.00401.2
10091.4091.491.400879.0
20$(*)$20107.7-148.0126.99.30248.5
50107.7-135.0122.27.10626.0
100107.7-122.4116.03.701,312.0
25$(*)$20146.3-196.9175.414.75234.9
50140.8-195.4165.315.92774.2
100143.4-188.7154.410.501,824.1
21066.82066.8076.868.43.6093.08
5066.8068.666.90.20212.9
10066.8066.866.800497.1
15103.020109.36.12140.2125.66.40197.3
50103.00130.5120.26.50535.2
100105.22.14124.2116.64.401,207.4
20$(*)$20149.7-191.8170.39.83208.3
50142.3-184.0166.27.55694.3
100149.7-191.0163.710.431,520.2
25$(*)$20177.5-231.2202.812.512295.8
50171.6-207.3190.910.46938.4
100173.6-208.7187.08.641,771.2
31099.02099.0099.099.00043.9
5099.0099.099.000109.0
10099.0099.099.000239.9
15216.020216.00241.0222.45.00147.0
50216.00241.0220.14.80377.2
100216.00221.0217.42.30796.1
20$(*)$20306.0-423.0343.625.10184.0
50304.0-344.0316.511.350585.2
100304.0-401.0312.016.001,222.6
25$(*)$20401.0-508.0466.824.41236.7
50346.0-522.0422.546.22753.3
100346.0-483.0404.841.601,476.9
410137.020137.00147.0140.04.6084.7
50137.00137.0137.000180.4
100137.00137.0137.000406.6
15265.020277.04.53363.0291.614.60196.3
50275.03.77294.0284.65.40530.0
100265.00287.0281.44.801,294.4
20$(*)$20354.0-479.0423.724.71217.5
50407.0-454.0423.215.25676.3
100350.0-454.0396.329.501,498.9
25$(*)$20484.0-632.0543.231.914304.6
50431.0-567.0517.934.37894.2
100431.0-558.0505.331.861,818.1
Note: (*) a feasible solution was not found before the time limit of 8.64E+4 seconds (24 hours)
[1]

Yaw Chang, Lin Chen. Solve the vehicle routing problem with time windows via a genetic algorithm. Conference Publications, 2007, 2007 (Special) : 240-249. doi: 10.3934/proc.2007.2007.240

[2]

Bin Feng, Lixin Wei, Ziyu Hu. An adaptive large neighborhood search algorithm for Vehicle Routing Problem with Multiple Time Windows constraints. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021197

[3]

T. W. Leung, Chi Kin Chan, Marvin D. Troutt. A mixed simulated annealing-genetic algorithm approach to the multi-buyer multi-item joint replenishment problem: advantages of meta-heuristics. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2008, 4 (1) : 53-66. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2008.4.53

[4]

Erfan Babaee Tirkolaee, Alireza Goli, Mani Bakhsi, Iraj Mahdavi. A robust multi-trip vehicle routing problem of perishable products with intermediate depots and time windows. Numerical Algebra, Control and Optimization, 2017, 7 (4) : 417-433. doi: 10.3934/naco.2017026

[5]

Jingwen Zhang, Wanjun Liu, Wanlin Liu. An efficient genetic algorithm for decentralized multi-project scheduling with resource transfers. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2022, 18 (1) : 1-24. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020140

[6]

Jiao-Yan Li, Xiao Hu, Zhong Wan. An integrated bi-objective optimization model and improved genetic algorithm for vehicle routing problems with temporal and spatial constraints. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2020, 16 (3) : 1203-1220. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018200

[7]

Ming-Yong Lai, Chang-Shi Liu, Xiao-Jiao Tong. A two-stage hybrid meta-heuristic for pickup and delivery vehicle routing problem with time windows. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2010, 6 (2) : 435-451. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2010.6.435

[8]

Didem Cinar, José António Oliveira, Y. Ilker Topcu, Panos M. Pardalos. A priority-based genetic algorithm for a flexible job shop scheduling problem. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2016, 12 (4) : 1391-1415. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016.12.1391

[9]

Ömer Arslan, Selçuk Kürşat İşleyen. A model and two heuristic methods for The Multi-Product Inventory-Location-Routing Problem with heterogeneous fleet. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2022, 18 (2) : 897-932. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021002

[10]

Binghai Zhou, Yuanrui Lei, Shi Zong. Lagrangian relaxation algorithm for the truck scheduling problem with products time window constraint in multi-door cross-dock. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021151

[11]

Zongwei Chen. An online-decision algorithm for the multi-period bank clearing problem. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021091

[12]

Lan Luo, Zhe Zhang, Yong Yin. Simulated annealing and genetic algorithm based method for a bi-level seru loading problem with worker assignment in seru production systems. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (2) : 779-803. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019134

[13]

Abdel-Rahman Hedar, Alaa Fahim. Filter-based genetic algorithm for mixed variable programming. Numerical Algebra, Control and Optimization, 2011, 1 (1) : 99-116. doi: 10.3934/naco.2011.1.99

[14]

Ashkan Ayough, Farbod Farhadi, Mostafa Zandieh, Parisa Rastkhadiv. Genetic algorithm for obstacle location-allocation problems with customer priorities. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 1753-1769. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020044

[15]

Canghua Jiang, Cheng Jin, Ming Yu, Zongqi Xu. Direct optimal control for time-delay systems via a lifted multiple shooting algorithm. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021135

[16]

Xueling Zhou, Meixia Li, Haitao Che. Relaxed successive projection algorithm with strong convergence for the multiple-sets split equality problem. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (5) : 2557-2572. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020082

[17]

Ming-Jong Yao, Tien-Cheng Hsu. An efficient search algorithm for obtaining the optimal replenishment strategies in multi-stage just-in-time supply chain systems. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2009, 5 (1) : 11-32. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2009.5.11

[18]

Haodong Chen, Hongchun Sun, Yiju Wang. A complementarity model and algorithm for direct multi-commodity flow supply chain network equilibrium problem. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 2217-2242. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020066

[19]

Shoufeng Ji, Jinhuan Tang, Minghe Sun, Rongjuan Luo. Multi-objective optimization for a combined location-routing-inventory system considering carbon-capped differences. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2022, 18 (3) : 1949-1977. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021051

[20]

Fan Yuan, Dachuan Xu, Donglei Du, Min Li. An exact algorithm for stable instances of the $ k $-means problem with penalties in fixed-dimensional Euclidean space. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021122

2020 Impact Factor: 1.801

Metrics

  • PDF downloads (445)
  • HTML views (1880)
  • Cited by (0)

[Back to Top]