4.7 Article

A modified Ant Colony System for the asset protection problem

期刊

SWARM AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION
卷 73, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.swevo.2022.101109

关键词

Asset protection problem; Ant colony optimization; Synchronization; Vehicle routing

资金

  1. European Union (European Social Fund-ESF) through the Operational Programme Human Resources Development, Education and Lifelong Learning [MIS-5000432]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research addresses a challenging problem in emergency response, namely how to effectively protect crucial community assets under temporal and spatial constraints. By introducing the Modified Ant Colony System algorithm, superior solutions can be achieved within operational time limits.
During an escaped wildfire in a populated area's vicinity, protective tasks should be carried out to secure crucial community assets, e.g., bridges, hospitals, power stations, and communication towers. In a real-life scenario, an important asset may require the combined effort of different fire suppression resources, which should be dispatched and scheduled to act synchronously in protecting the respective asset. The present research addresses the solution of a challenging routing problem in emergency response, the Asset Protection Problem (APP), which incorporates selective characteristics in routing a heterogeneous vehicle fleet with complex temporal and spatial constraints, i.e., time windows and synchronization requirements. Notably, the Modified Ant Colony System (MACS) algorithm is proposed to obtain effective APP solutions within a time suitable for operational purposes. Based on the conducted experiments, MACS outperforms the previously published solution approaches in the solution of large-scale APP benchmark instances. Notably, MACS obtained superior solutions in 159 out of 240 large-scale instances, while 87 of them represent new best results, considering the solutions achieved by the commercial solver CPLEX with a ten-hour time limit.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据