4.4 Article

Analytics Branching and Selection for the Capacitated Multi-Item Lot Sizing Problem with Nonidentical Machines

期刊

INFORMS JOURNAL ON COMPUTING
卷 30, 期 2, 页码 236-258

出版社

INFORMS
DOI: 10.1287/ijoc.2017.0777

关键词

production planning and scheduling; column generation; Dantzig-Wolfe decomposition; lot sizing; nonidentical parallel machines; analytics branching and selection

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [71422003, 71531011, 71472108]
  2. Shenzhen Municipal Science and Technology Innovation Committee [JCYJ20160531195231085]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We study a capacitated multi-item lot sizing problem with nonidentical machines. For the problem, we propose several mathematical formulations and their per-item and per-period Dantzig-Wolfe decompositions, followed by exploring their relative efficiency in obtaining lower and upper bounds. Additionally, we observe that the optimum has a correlation with the solution values of the pricing subproblems of Dantzig-Wolfe decompositions, along with the solution values of the uncapacitated problems and linear programming (LP) relaxation. Using these solution values, we build statistical estimation models (i.e., generalized linear models) that give insight on the optimal values, as well as information about how likely a setup variable is to take a value of 1 at an optimal point. We then develop an analytics branching and selection method where the information is utilized for an analytics-based branching and selection procedure to fix setup variables, which is, to our knowledge, the first research using likelihood information to improve solution qualities. This method differs from approaches that use solution values of LP relaxation (e.g., relaxation induced neighborhood search, feasibility pump, and LP and fix). The application is followed by extensive computational tests. Comparisons with other methods indicate that the optimization method is computationally tractable and can obtain better results.

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

4.4
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