4.7 Article

Consolidated optimization algorithm for resource-constrained project scheduling problems

Journal

INFORMATION SCIENCES
Volume 418, Issue -, Pages 346-362

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2017.08.023

Keywords

Resource-constrained project scheduling problems; Evolutionary algorithms; Multi-algorithm; multi-operator

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council Discovery Project [DP150102583]
  2. CONACyT [221551]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Resource-constrained project scheduling problems (RCPSPs) represent an important class of practical problems. Over the years, many optimization algorithms for solving them have been proposed, with their performances evaluated using well-established test instances with various levels of complexity. While it is desirable to obtain a high-quality solution and fast rate of convergence from an optimization algorithm, no single one performs well across the entire space of instances. Furthermore, even fora given algorithm, the optimal choice of its operators and control parameters may vary from one problem to another. To deal with this issue, we present a generic framework for solving RCPSPs in which various meta-heuristics, each with multiple search operators, are self-adaptively used during the search process and more emphasis is placed on the better-performing algorithms, and their underlying search operators. To further improve the rate of convergence and introduce good-quality solutions into the population earlier, a local search approach is introduced. The experimental results clearly indicate the capability of the proposed algorithm to attain high-quality results using a small population. Compared with several state-of-the-art algorithms, the proposed one delivers the best solutions for problems with 30 and 60 activities, and is very competitive for those involving 120 activities. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available