4.7 Article

Stabilized branch-and-price algorithms for vector packing problems

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH
卷 271, 期 2, 页码 401-419

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2018.04.047

关键词

Cutting; Vector packing; Shortest path problem with resource constraints; Dual-optimal inequalities; Stabilization

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [IR 122/6-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper considers packing and cutting problems in which a packing/cutting pattern is constrained independently in two or more dimensions. Examples are restrictions with respect to weight, length, and value. We present branch-and-price algorithms to solve these vector packing problems (VPPs) exactly. The underlying column-generation procedure uses an extended master program that is stabilized by (deep) dual-optimal inequalities. While some inequalities are added to the master program right from the beginning (static version), other violated dual-optimal inequalities are added dynamically. The column generation subproblem is a multidimensional knapsack problem, either binary, bounded, or unbounded depending on the specific master problem formulation. Its fast resolution is decisive for the overall performance of the branch-and-price algorithm. In order to provide a generic but still efficient solution approach for the subproblem, we formulate it as a shortest path problem with resource constraints (SPPRC), yielding the following advantages: (i) Violated dual-optimal inequalities can be identified as a by-product of the SPPRC labeling approach and thus be added dynamically; (ii) branching decisions can be implemented into the subproblem without deteriorating its resolution process; and (iii) larger instances of higher-dimensional VPPs can be tackled with branch-and-price for the first time. Extensive computational results show that our branch-and-price algorithms are capable of solving VPP benchmark instances effectively. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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