swords

Ant Colony Optimisation: 

Ant Colony Optimisation Dr Jonathan Thompson, School of Mathematics, Cardiff University

Outline: 

Outline Introduction to ant algorithms Overview of implementation for TSP (Dorigo et al.) Application to Dynamic Vehicle Routing (Wallace and Thompson) Application to Room Fitting (Thompson) Application to Examination Timetabling / Graph Colouring (Dowsland and Thompson) Conclusions

Classification of Meta-heuristics: 

Classification of Meta-heuristics Osman divided meta-heuristics into: Local search Population Construction

Slide4: 

Solution Space Feasible regions

Slide5: 

Local Search Solution Space

Slide6: 

Local Search Solution Space

Slide7: 

Local Search Solution Space

Slide8: 

Population Based Solution Space

Slide9: 

Population Based Solution Space

Slide10: 

Construction Solution Space

Slide11: 

Construction Solution Space

Slide12: 

Construction Solution Space

Ant Algorithms: 

Ant Algorithms

Slide14: 

The Ant System in Nature

Ant Algorithms: 

Ant Algorithms Proposed by Dorigo et al. Probabilistic greedy construction heuristic Probabilities are adjusted according to information on solution quality gained from previous solutions Initially use limited to routing problems but now being applied to a broad range of problems.

Ant Systems for the TSP: 

Ant Systems for the TSP No. ants = No. cities Each ant i produces a (probabilistic) solution, cost ci Trail between each pair of cities in route i = trail + Q/ci Trail is subject to evaporation i.e. trail = trail * σ, σ < 1 Each ant chooses next city with a probability proportional to the distance and the trail.

Ants for TSP: 

Ants for TSP Probability of next city from i being k is P(ik) = [ik] [ik]  [jk] [jk] where μik = Q / distance from i to k, ik = trail between i and k. Continues through generations until reaches stagnation Has outperformed other meta-heuristics

The Static VRP: 

The Static VRP A set of geographically dispersed customers need to be serviced. All routes start and end at the depot. A cost cij, is associated with travelling from customer i to customer j. Customer i has demand Di, vehicles have capacity Q Construct a set of routes such that cost is minimised and each customer is visited once and capacity constraints are satisfied.

Example VRP: 

Example VRP

Adding Dynamism (DVRP): 

Adding Dynamism (DVRP) Static VRP Customers are known a priori and do not change after the routes have been constructed. Dynamic VRP Customers can change after the initial routes have been constructed.

Graphically Explained: 

Graphically Explained New Customer Arrives What happens now ?

Two Solution Approaches: 

Two Solution Approaches Insertion Heuristics Insert the new customers in the current routes. Improvement heuristics when system is idle. Re-Optimization i.e. solve static VRPs Re-planning from scratch when new information is received / after each time period.

Graphically Explained – Re-Opt: 

Graphically Explained – Re-Opt New Customer Arrives If capacity is not exceeded then a new route is created. Current route is discarded. If exceeded then new routes are constructed

ACS-DVRP Pseudo-code: 

ACS-DVRP Pseudo-code Overnight, an initial solution is created and commit drivers to customers for first time period + small commitment time. Each time period is then considered in turn. Customers = existing customers who have not been committed to + new customers who arrived during the previous time slot. Solve problem during current time period and commit drivers to customers if start time is within the subsequent time period Continue until all customers are committed to.

Roulette Wheel Choice: 

Roulette Wheel Choice A schedule is being created, truck is at customer i. A roulette wheel type selection is made to decide where to go next. Size of the slot depends on attractiveness of the move.

Ants for the DVRP (ACS-DVRP): 

Ants for the DVRP (ACS-DVRP) Better solutions obtained by: Diversification: local trail update ij = (1 – ρ) ij + ρ 0 Select best choice with probability q, probabilistically with probability (1 – q). Elitism – only use best ant solution to update trail globally Maintain trails from one problem to another ij = (1 – γ) ij + γ 0 Apply descent to each ant solution Full parameter optimisation

Preliminary Results: 

Preliminary Results Min, Ave, Max 3 Data Sets

Problems with the ACS-DVRP: 

Problems with the ACS-DVRP Sequential route construction: Each route is completed before the next is created. Customers may be scheduled in an early truck, though may have been better placed in a later one. High variance within results: Difficult to interpret results. Minimized through use of trials.

Extended Roulette Wheel: 

Extended Roulette Wheel Consider more than 1 truck at a time. Arcs that would have been ignored previously are now considered. Consider 3 trucks, 1 at customer i, 1 at customer j and 1 at the depot

Extended Roulette Wheel Results: 

Extended Roulette Wheel Results Why ? An increase in the number of trucks used.

Truck Reduction Techniques: 

Truck Reduction Techniques Capacity Utilization. Encourages the use of existing trucks over the selection of a new truck. Let kij=(Qi+qj)/Q Advanced construction formula

Truck Reduction Results: 

Truck Reduction Results Reduction in average cost for each data set.

Truck Reduction Graphic: 

Truck Reduction Graphic

The Room Fitting Problem: 

The Room Fitting Problem Allocate examinations to rooms such that :- no rooms are overfull exams of different length are allocated to different rooms Additional objectives:- Minimise the number of split exams Allocate exams to adjacent rooms

Simple Solutions : 

Simple Solutions Randomly allocate exams to rooms Evaluate cost function = overflow + number of pairs of exams of different duration in the same room Randomly move a single exam to a new room or swap two exams Apply local search - SA / TS etc.

Ants for Room Fitting: 

Ants for Room Fitting Number of ants = number of exams Exams ordered according to size / duration Initially, each ant i produces a solution, with cost ci. Possible trail: Between pairs of exams? (1) Or Between exams and rooms (2) 1(j,k)= 1 (j,k) + 100/ci if ant i places exams j and k in the same room 2 (j,l) = 2 (j,l) + 100/ci if ant i places exam j in room l All trails are reduced by an evaporation rate

Ants for Room Fitting: 

Ants for Room Fitting Each ant now produces another solution, by considering each exam in turn and choosing which room to place it in according to the two trails and the immediate cost. The trails are combined so that the trail associated with allocating exam j to room k is combined with the trails between exam j and any other exams already allocated to room k.

The Trails: 

The Trails How should we combine the trails? Average of all trails. Average of the two trails. Alter the factor applied to each trail according to the cost function. When producing trails, just use part of cost function concerning each trail.

Experiments: 

Experiments Data Set One - Artificial, Optimal cost = 0, one optimal solution only. Size varies from 5 rooms, 13 exams to 20 rooms, 70 exams Data Set Two - Real, Optimal cost is unknown. Size varies from 12 exams to 90 exams. Five random runs Best parameters found by experimentation with artificial data, then used on real data set.

Results from Artificial Data: 

Results from Artificial Data

Results from Real Data: 

Results from Real Data

Graph Colouring: 

Graph Colouring Given a Graph with a set of vertices and a set of edges, assign to each vertex a colour so that no adjacent vertices have the same colour. NP-Complete Applications include timetabling, frequency assignment and register allocation.

Ants for Graph Colouring: 

Ants for Graph Colouring Costa and Hertz, Ants Can Colour Graphs (1997) Each ant produces a solution by choosing vertices randomly in proportion to some definition of cost. Allocate to some colour. A trail records the quality of solution when pairs of vertices are in the same colour class. Subsequent ants construct solutions, considering cost (visibility) and trail. Trails are subject to evaporation.

Ants for Graph Colouring: 

Ants for Graph Colouring Normal Probabilistic selection: Trail update: tij = ρtij +  1/q(s) for each solution s in which vertices i and j are in the same colour class Trail calculation: jk = tij / |Vk| where Vk = no. vertices already coloured k.

Ants for Graph Colouring: 

Ants for Graph Colouring Eight variants based on RLF and DSatur: W = uncoloured vertices than can be included in current colour class B = uncoloured vertices that cannot be included in current colour class degX(i) = degree of vertex i in subgraph of vertices X RLF(i,j), i = visibility, j = choice of first vertex i = 1 degB(i) j = 1 max degW(i) i = 2 |W| - degW(i) j = 2 randomly i = 3 degBUW(i)

Ants for Graph Colouring: 

Ants for Graph Colouring DSatur(i). Visibility = saturation degree i = 1. First available colour. i = 2. Vertex chosen wrt visibility. Colour chosen probabilistically wrt trail. Results are encouraging. However Vesel and Zerovnik (2000) question quality of results.

Improvements - Reward Function: 

Improvements - Reward Function 40 colour graph No. Colours Trail Ratio 41 1 42 0.976 43 0.953 44 0.932 10 colour graph No. Colours Trail Ratio 11 1 12 0.917 13 0.846 14 0.785

Improved Reward Function: 

Improved Reward Function Instead reward function = 1 q(s) - r where r = best solution so far N colour graph No. Extra Trail Ratio Colours 1 1 2 0.5 3 0.33 4 0.25

Further Improvements: 

Further Improvements Solution 1 r colours rth colour class contains several vertices Solution 2 r colours rth colour class contains one vertex Instead limit number of colours to target value and use number of uncoloured vertices u(s) as the reward function.

Potential Problems: 

Potential Problems No trail from uncoloured vertices Instead trail between uncoloured vertices and all other vertices is increased by 1/u(s) This is a diversification function.

Experiments: 

Experiments Initially used examination scheduling data Known number of colours (number of timeslots) Some structure to graphs Larger number of large cliques than random graphs

Examination Scheduling Data: 

Examination Scheduling Data 7 datasets from Carter Problem sizes vary between 80 and 487 vertices Density varies between 6% and 29% Maximum clique between 10 and 21 Clique vertices have high degree Optimal colouring between 10 and 21

Results for Sample Dataset: 

Results for Sample Dataset

Results for all Datasets: 

Results for all Datasets

Results for Best Parameters: 

Results for Best Parameters

Best Ant Implementation: 

Best Ant Implementation RLF(1,2) Reward function of 1/u(s) Diversification included Alpha = 2, higher beta values (4 or 5) Evaporation rate = 0.5 Results confirmed on larger datasets Results comparable to those of other researchers

Random Graphs: 

Random Graphs Graphs used by Costa and Hertz (from Ferland and Fleurent) 20 G(100,0.5), 10 G(300,0.5), 5 G(500,0.5) and 2 G(1000,0.5) Size C & H D & T 100 15.2 15.15 300 35.7 34.5 500 55.6 53.0 1000 111.0 100.5

Random Graphs: 

Random Graphs Graphs used by Costa and Hertz (from Ferland and Fleurent) 20 G(100,0.5), 10 G(300,0.5), 5 G(500,0.5) and 2 G(1000,0.5) Size C & H D & T C et al. 100 15.2 15.15 14.95 300 35.7 34.5 33.3 500 55.6 53.0 49.5 1000 111.0 100.5 85.0

Random Graphs: 

Random Graphs Emphasise diversity function by raising to power

Improvements : 

Improvements Improve Construction – make several attempts at each colour class and select the one that minimises the no. edges in remaining graph Change evaluation function to no. clashing edges if vertex inserted into best colour class Add local search

Local Search : 

Local Search Shuffle – Reorder colours and move vertices into earlier colours if possible. Focus on likely colour classes i.e. consider them last. Tree. Depth first search where uncoloured vertices are coloured into colours with least clashes, and clashing vertices are moved out, and we try to colour them elsewhere. Tabu Search, considering clashing vertices. Tabu list contains vertex colour pairs

Best Results: 

Best Results * = Costa et al.

Conclusions: 

Conclusions Ant colony optimisation is a competitive meta-heuristic for a wide variety of problems Often needs extra assistance e.g. local search Need the correct balance between intensification and diversification (exploitation and exploration) Randomness is important Parameter heavy Future – consider more ill-structured / dynamic / stochastic problems