4.7 Article

Multi-objective optimization matching for one-shot multi-attribute exchanges with quantity discounts in E-brokerage

Journal

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages 4169-4180

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.09.079

Keywords

E-brokerage; Multi-attribute exchanges; Multi-objective optimization; Quantity discounts; Genetic algorithm; Simulated annealing

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [70801012, 90924016, 70721001, 70525002]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [20080441087, 200902543]
  3. Northeastern University Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China [20080413]
  4. Hong Kong Polytechnic University [G-YF56]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Electronic brokerages (E-brokerages) are Internet-based organizations that enable buyers and sellers to do business with each other. While E-brokerages have become a significant sector of E-commerce, theory and guidelines for matching the multi-attribute exchange in E-brokerage are sparse. This paper presents an approach to optimize the matching of one-shot multi-attribute exchanges with quantity discounts. Firstly, based on the conception and definition of matching degree and quantity discount, a multi-objective optimization model is proposed to maximize the matching degree and trade volume. This model belongs to a class of multi-objective nonlinear transportation problems and cannot be solved effectively by conventional methods, especially when large-scale problems are involved. Hence, secondly, a novel hybrid multi-objective meta-heuristic algorithm named multi-objective simulated annealing genetic algorithm (MOSAGA) has been developed to solve the proposed model. Finally, the computational results and analyses of some numerical problems are given to illustrate the application and performance of the proposed model and algorithm. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. 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