American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

• Previous Article
Robust equilibrium control-measure policy for a DC pension plan with state-dependent risk aversion under mean-variance criterion
• JIMO Home
• This Issue
• Next Article
Multi-stage distributionally robust optimization with risk aversion
doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019117

Multi-period hazardous waste collection planning with consideration of risk stability

 School of Economics and Management, Beijing University of Chemical Technology, Beijing 100029, China

* Corresponding author: Xiang Li

Received  January 2019 Revised  March 2019 Published  September 2019

Hazardous wastes are likely to cause danger to humans and the environment. In this paper, a new mathematical optimization model is developed for the multi-period hazardous waste collection planning problem. The hazardous wastes generated by each source are time-varying in weight and allow incomplete and delayed collection. The aim of the model is to help decision makers determine the weight of hazardous wastes to collect from each source and the transportation routes of vehicles in each period. In the developed model, three objectives are considered simultaneously: (1) minimisation of total cost over all periods, which includes start-up fee of vehicles, transportation cost of hazardous wastes, and penalty fee for the delayed collection; (2) minimisation of total transportation risk posing to the surrounding of routes over all periods; and (3) even distribution of transportation risk among all periods, also called risk stability. The developed multi-objective model is transformed into a single-objective one based on the weighted sums method, which is finally equated to a mixed 0-1 linear programming by introducing a set of auxiliary variables and constraints. Numerical experiments are computed with CPLEX software to find the optimal solutions. The computational results and parameters analysis demonstrate the applicability and validity of the developed model. It is found that the consideration of the risk stability can reduce the total transportation risk, the uneven distribution of the transportation risk among all periods, and the maximum number of vehicles used, though increasing the total cost to some extent.

Citation: Hongguang Ma, Xiang Li. Multi-period hazardous waste collection planning with consideration of risk stability. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019117
References:

show all references

References:
The results of period 1
The influence of $\lambda_3$
The influence of $W$
The weight of hazardous wastes generated by each factory in each period (Tons)
 Period Factory 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 28 19 21 24 32 20 22 2 19 27 23 16 25 11 14 3 12 20 15 10 14 13 17
 Period Factory 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 28 19 21 24 32 20 22 2 19 27 23 16 25 11 14 3 12 20 15 10 14 13 17
The transportation cost (＄/Ton) and the number of population exposed (Pop/Ton) of transporting a unit weight of hazardous wastes from one node to another
 Node 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 0/0 8/7 10/10 11/3 6/11 11/13 8/4 10/14 1 0/0 17/9 17/6 7/8 14/11 3/11 11/17 2 0/0 2/7 16/2 9/4 16/12 12/10 3 0/0 17/8 7/11 15/6 10/13 4 0/0 17/3 9/13 15/12 5 0/0 11/16 4/12 6 0/0 8/13 7 0/0
 Node 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 0/0 8/7 10/10 11/3 6/11 11/13 8/4 10/14 1 0/0 17/9 17/6 7/8 14/11 3/11 11/17 2 0/0 2/7 16/2 9/4 16/12 12/10 3 0/0 17/8 7/11 15/6 10/13 4 0/0 17/3 9/13 15/12 5 0/0 11/16 4/12 6 0/0 8/13 7 0/0
The computational results
 $\lambda_1 = 1, \lambda_2 = 2, \lambda_3 = 0$ $\lambda_1 = 1, \lambda_2 = 2, \lambda_3 = 5$ Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 No. of vehicles 6 4 4 5 5 5 Transportation cost(＄) 6373 5278 4704 5399.8 5134.7 5445 Penalty fee(＄) 0 0 0 1415.7 1250 0 Transportation risk (Pop) 2442 2279 1726 1971.7 1971.7 1955 Total cost(＄) 16355 18645.2 Total transportation risk (Pop) 6447 5898.4
 $\lambda_1 = 1, \lambda_2 = 2, \lambda_3 = 0$ $\lambda_1 = 1, \lambda_2 = 2, \lambda_3 = 5$ Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 No. of vehicles 6 4 4 5 5 5 Transportation cost(＄) 6373 5278 4704 5399.8 5134.7 5445 Penalty fee(＄) 0 0 0 1415.7 1250 0 Transportation risk (Pop) 2442 2279 1726 1971.7 1971.7 1955 Total cost(＄) 16355 18645.2 Total transportation risk (Pop) 6447 5898.4
 [1] Jian Xiong, Zhongbao Zhou, Ke Tian, Tianjun Liao, Jianmai Shi. A multi-objective approach for weapon selection and planning problems in dynamic environments. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (3) : 1189-1211. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016068 [2] Tien-Fu Liang, Hung-Wen Cheng. Multi-objective aggregate production planning decisions using two-phase fuzzy goal programming method. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2011, 7 (2) : 365-383. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2011.7.365 [3] Zongmin Li, Jiuping Xu, Wenjing Shen, Benjamin Lev, Xiao Lei. Bilevel multi-objective construction site security planning with twofold random phenomenon. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2015, 11 (2) : 595-617. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2015.11.595 [4] Han Yang, Jia Yue, Nan-jing Huang. Multi-objective robust cross-market mixed portfolio optimization under hierarchical risk integration. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (5) : 1-17. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018177 [5] Lin Jiang, Song Wang. Robust multi-period and multi-objective portfolio selection. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (5) : 0-0. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019130 [6] Masoud Mohammadzadeh, Alireza Arshadi Khamseh, Mohammad Mohammadi. A multi-objective integrated model for closed-loop supply chain configuration and supplier selection considering uncertain demand and different performance levels. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (2) : 1041-1064. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016061 [7] Dušan M. Stipanović, Claire J. Tomlin, George Leitmann. A note on monotone approximations of minimum and maximum functions and multi-objective problems. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2011, 1 (3) : 487-493. doi: 10.3934/naco.2011.1.487 [8] Hamed Fazlollahtabar, Mohammad Saidi-Mehrabad. Optimizing multi-objective decision making having qualitative evaluation. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2015, 11 (3) : 747-762. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2015.11.747 [9] Xia Zhao, Jianping Dou. Bi-objective integrated supply chain design with transportation choices: A multi-objective particle swarm optimization. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (3) : 1263-1288. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018095 [10] Adriel Cheng, Cheng-Chew Lim. Optimizing system-on-chip verifications with multi-objective genetic evolutionary algorithms. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2014, 10 (2) : 383-396. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2014.10.383 [11] Liwei Zhang, Jihong Zhang, Yule Zhang. Second-order optimality conditions for cone constrained multi-objective optimization. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2018, 14 (3) : 1041-1054. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017089 [12] Danthai Thongphiew, Vira Chankong, Fang-Fang Yin, Q. Jackie Wu. An on-line adaptive radiation therapy system for intensity modulated radiation therapy: An application of multi-objective optimization. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2008, 4 (3) : 453-475. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2008.4.453 [13] Min Zhang, Gang Li. Multi-objective optimization algorithm based on improved particle swarm in cloud computing environment. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2019, 12 (4&5) : 1413-1426. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2019097 [14] Lorena Rodríguez-Gallego, Antonella Barletta Carolina Cabrera, Carla Kruk, Mariana Nin, Antonio Mauttone. Establishing limits to agriculture and afforestation: A GIS based multi-objective approach to prevent algal blooms in a coastal lagoon. Journal of Dynamics & Games, 2019, 6 (2) : 159-178. doi: 10.3934/jdg.2019012 [15] Zixue Guo, Fengxuan Song, Yumeng Zheng, Zefang He. An improved fuzzy linear weighting method of multi-objective programming problems and its application. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2018, 0 (0) : 0-0. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020175 [16] Qiang Long, Xue Wu, Changzhi Wu. Non-dominated sorting methods for multi-objective optimization: Review and numerical comparison. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (5) : 0-0. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020009 [17] Henri Bonnel, Ngoc Sang Pham. Nonsmooth optimization over the (weakly or properly) Pareto set of a linear-quadratic multi-objective control problem: Explicit optimality conditions. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2011, 7 (4) : 789-809. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2011.7.789 [18] Azam Moradi, Jafar Razmi, Reza Babazadeh, Ali Sabbaghnia. An integrated Principal Component Analysis and multi-objective mathematical programming approach to agile supply chain network design under uncertainty. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (2) : 855-879. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018074 [19] Gang Huang, Edoardo Beretta, Yasuhiro Takeuchi. Global stability for epidemic model with constant latency and infectious periods. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2012, 9 (2) : 297-312. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2012.9.297 [20] Ábel Garab, Veronika Kovács, Tibor Krisztin. Global stability of a price model with multiple delays. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2016, 36 (12) : 6855-6871. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2016098

2018 Impact Factor: 1.025

Tools

Article outline

Figures and Tables