Characterising the rankings produced by combinatorial optimisation problems and finding their intersections

The aim of this paper is to introduce the concept of intersection between combinatorial optimisation problems. We take into account that most algorithms, in their machinery, do not consider the exact objective function values of the solutions, but only a comparison between them. In this sense, if the solutions of an instance of a combinatorial optimisation problem are sorted into their objective function values, we can see the instances as (partial) rankings of the solutions of the search space. Working with specific problems, particularly, the linear ordering problem and the symmetric and asymmetric traveling salesman problem, we show that they can not generate the whole set of (partial) rankings of the solutions of the search space, but just a subset. First, we characterise the set of (partial) rankings each problem can generate. Secondly, we study the intersections between these problems: those rankings which can be generated by both the linear ordering problem and the symmetric/asymmetric traveling salesman problem, respectively. The fact of finding large intersections between problems can be useful in order to transfer heuristics from one problem to another, or to define heuristics that can be useful for more than one problem.

[1]  Michel Gendreau,et al.  Handbook of Metaheuristics , 2010 .

[2]  Manuel Laguna,et al.  Tabu Search , 1997 .

[3]  Christopher C. Skiscim,et al.  Optimization by simulated annealing: A preliminary computational study for the TSP , 1983, WSC '83.

[4]  Rafael Martí,et al.  Variable neighborhood search for the linear ordering problem , 2006, Comput. Oper. Res..

[5]  Hollis B. Chenery,et al.  International Comparisons of the Structure of Production , 1958 .

[6]  Thomas Stützle,et al.  The linear ordering problem: Instances, search space analysis and algorithms , 2004, J. Math. Model. Algorithms.

[7]  Sébastien Vérel,et al.  NILS: A Neutrality-Based Iterated Local Search and Its Application to Flowshop Scheduling , 2011, EvoCOP.

[8]  Toby Walsh,et al.  The TSP Phase Transition , 1996, Artif. Intell..

[9]  Alexander Mendiburu,et al.  Are we generating instances uniformly at random? , 2017, 2017 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[10]  Alexander Mendiburu,et al.  A Distance-Based Ranking Model Estimation of Distribution Algorithm for the Flowshop Scheduling Problem , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[11]  É. Taillard Some efficient heuristic methods for the flow shop sequencing problem , 1990 .

[12]  Adam Lipowski,et al.  Roulette-wheel selection via stochastic acceptance , 2011, ArXiv.

[13]  Michel Gendreau,et al.  A PARALLEL TABU SEARCH HEURISTIC FOR THE VEHICLE ROUTING PROBLEM WITH TIME WINDOWS , 1997 .

[14]  Stefan Chanas,et al.  A new heuristic algorithm solving the linear ordering problem , 1996, Comput. Optim. Appl..

[15]  Gerhard Reinelt,et al.  The Linear Ordering Problem: Exact and Heuristic Methods in Combinatorial Optimization , 2011 .

[16]  Thomas Stützle,et al.  Iterated local search for the quadratic assignment problem , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[17]  T. Stützle,et al.  Iterated Local Search: Framework and Applications , 2018, Handbook of Metaheuristics.

[18]  Rafael Martí,et al.  Intensification and diversification with elite tabu search solutions for the linear ordering problem , 1999, Comput. Oper. Res..

[19]  P. Preux,et al.  Towards hybrid evolutionary algorithms , 1999 .

[20]  T. L. Ward,et al.  Solving Quadratic Assignment Problems by ‘Simulated Annealing’ , 1987 .

[21]  Andrew B. Kahng,et al.  A new adaptive multi-start technique for combinatorial global optimizations , 1994, Oper. Res. Lett..