Document Open Access Logo

Solving the Constrained Single-Row Facility Layout Problem with Decision Diagrams

Authors Vianney Coppé , Xavier Gillard , Pierre Schaus

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.CP.2022.14.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.81 MB
  • 18 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Vianney Coppé
  • UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Xavier Gillard
  • UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Pierre Schaus
  • UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

Cite AsGet BibTex

Vianney Coppé, Xavier Gillard, and Pierre Schaus. Solving the Constrained Single-Row Facility Layout Problem with Decision Diagrams. In 28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 235, pp. 14:1-14:18, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.14

Abstract

The Single-Row Facility Layout Problem is an NP-hard problem dealing with the ordering of departments with given lengths and pairwise traffic intensities in a facility. In this context, one seeks to minimize the sum of the distances between department pairs, weighted by the corresponding traffic intensities. Practical applications of this problem include the arrangement of rooms on a corridor in hospitals or offices, airplanes and gates in an airport or machines in a manufacture. This paper presents two novel exact models for the Constrained Single-Row Facility Layout Problem, a recent variant of the problem including positioning, ordering and adjacency constraints. On the one hand, the state-of-the-art mixed-integer programming model for the unconstrained problem is extended to incorporate the constraints. On the other hand, a decision diagram-based approach is described, based on an existing dynamic programming model for the unconstrained problem. Computational experiments show that both models outperform the only mixed-integer programming model in the literature, to the best of our knowledge. While the two models have execution times of the same order of magnitude, the decision diagram-based approach handles positioning constraints much better but the mixed-integer programming model has the advantage for ordering constraints.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Mathematics of computing → Combinatorial optimization
Keywords
  • Discrete Optimization
  • Mixed-Integer Programming
  • Decision Diagrams
  • Constrained Single-Row Facility Layout Problem

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

Supplementary Materials

References

  1. Sheldon B. Akers. Binary decision diagrams. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 27(06):509-516, 1978. Google Scholar
  2. André R. S. Amaral. On the exact solution of a facility layout problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 173(2):508-518, 2006. Google Scholar
  3. André R. S. Amaral. An exact approach to the one-dimensional facility layout problem. Operations Research, 56(4):1026-1033, 2008. Google Scholar
  4. André R. S. Amaral. A new lower bound for the single row facility layout problem. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 157(1):183-190, 2009. Google Scholar
  5. André R. S. Amaral and Adam N. Letchford. A polyhedral approach to the single row facility layout problem. Mathematical programming, 141(1-2):453-477, 2013. Google Scholar
  6. Henrik R. Andersen, Tarik Hadžić, John N. Hooker, and Peter Tiedemann. A constraint store based on multivalued decision diagrams. In International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, pages 118-132. Springer, 2007. Google Scholar
  7. Miguel F. Anjos, Andrew Kennings, and Anthony Vannelli. A semidefinite optimization approach for the single-row layout problem with unequal dimensions. Discrete Optimization, 2(2):113-122, 2005. Google Scholar
  8. Miguel F. Anjos and Anthony Vannelli. Computing globally optimal solutions for single-row layout problems using semidefinite programming and cutting planes. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 20(4):611-617, 2008. Google Scholar
  9. Miguel F. Anjos and Ginger Yen. Provably near-optimal solutions for very large single-row facility layout problems. Optimization Methods & Software, 24(4-5):805-817, 2009. Google Scholar
  10. Bernd Becker, Markus Behle, Friedrich Eisenbrand, and Ralf Wimmer. Bdds in a branch and cut framework. In International Workshop on Experimental and Efficient Algorithms, pages 452-463. Springer, 2005. Google Scholar
  11. David Bergman, Andre A. Cire, Willem-Jan van Hoeve, and John N. Hooker. Optimization bounds from binary decision diagrams. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 26(2):253-268, 2014. Google Scholar
  12. David Bergman, Andre A. Cire, Ashish Sabharwal, Horst Samulowitz, Vijay Saraswat, and Willem-Jan van Hoeve. Parallel combinatorial optimization with decision diagrams. In International Conference on AI and OR Techniques in Constraint Programming for Combinatorial Optimization Problems, pages 351-367. Springer, 2014. Google Scholar
  13. David Bergman, Andre A. Cire, Willem-Jan van Hoeve, and John N. Hooker. Discrete optimization with decision diagrams. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 28(1):47-66, 2016. Google Scholar
  14. David Bergman, Andre A. Cire, Willem-Jan van Hoeve, and Tallys Yunes. Bdd-based heuristics for binary optimization. Journal of Heuristics, 20(2):211-234, 2014. Google Scholar
  15. Randal E. Bryant. Graph-based algorithms for boolean function manipulation. Computers, IEEE Transactions on, 100(8):677-691, 1986. Google Scholar
  16. Margarita P. Castro, Andre A. Cire, and J. Christopher Beck. An mdd-based lagrangian approach to the multicommodity pickup-and-delivery tsp. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 32(2):263-278, 2020. Google Scholar
  17. Andre A. Cire and Willem-Jan van Hoeve. Multivalued decision diagrams for sequencing problems. Operations Research, 61(6):1411-1428, 2013. Google Scholar
  18. Dilip Datta, André R. S. Amaral, and José R. Figueira. Single row facility layout problem using a permutation-based genetic algorithm. European Journal of Operational Research, 213(2):388-394, 2011. Google Scholar
  19. Zvi Drezner. A heuristic procedure for the layout of a large number of facilities. Management Science, 33(7):907-915, 1987. Google Scholar
  20. Michael R. Garey and David S. Johnson. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-completeness. Books in mathematical series. W. H. Freeman, 1979. Google Scholar
  21. Xavier Gillard, Pierre Schaus, and Vianney Coppé. Ddo, a generic and efficient framework for mdd-based optimization. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-20), pages 5243-5245, 2020. Google Scholar
  22. Xavier Gillard, Pierre Schaus, Vianney Coppé, and André A. Cire. Improving the filtering of branch-and-bound mdd solver. In International Conference on the Integration of Constraint Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Operations Research, 2021. Google Scholar
  23. Jian Guan and Geng Lin. Hybridizing variable neighborhood search with ant colony optimization for solving the single row facility layout problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 248(3):899-909, 2016. Google Scholar
  24. LLC Gurobi Optimization. Gurobi optimizer reference manual, 2022. URL: https://www.gurobi.com.
  25. Gary D. Hachtel and Fabio Somenzi. A symbolic algorithms for maximum flow in 0-1 networks. Formal Methods in System Design, 10(2):207-219, 1997. Google Scholar
  26. Tarik Hadžić and John N. Hooker. Postoptimality analysis for integer programming using binary decision diagrams. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University, 2006. Google Scholar
  27. Tarik Hadžić and John N. Hooker. Cost-bounded binary decision diagrams for 0-1 programming. In Integration of AI and OR Techniques in Constraint Programming for Combinatorial Optimization Problems, pages 84-98. Springer, 2007. Google Scholar
  28. Kenneth M. Hall. An r-dimensional quadratic placement algorithm. Management science, 17(3):219-229, 1970. Google Scholar
  29. Sunderesh S. Heragu and Attahiru Sule Alfa. Experimental analysis of simulated annealing based algorithms for the layout problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 57(2):190-202, 1992. Google Scholar
  30. Sunderesh S. Heragu and Andrew Kusiak. Machine layout problem in flexible manufacturing systems. Operations research, 36(2):258-268, 1988. Google Scholar
  31. Sunderesh S. Heragu and Andrew Kusiak. Efficient models for the facility layout problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 53(1):1-13, 1991. Google Scholar
  32. Samid Hoda, Willem-Jan van Hoeve, and John N. Hooker. A systematic approach to mdd-based constraint programming. In International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, pages 266-280. Springer, 2010. Google Scholar
  33. John N. Hooker. Improved job sequencing bounds from decision diagrams. In International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, pages 268-283. Springer, 2019. Google Scholar
  34. Alan J. Hu. Techniques for efficient formal verification using binary decision diagrams. PhD thesis, Stanford University, Department of Computer Science, 1995. Google Scholar
  35. Philipp Hungerländer and Franz Rendl. A computational study and survey of methods for the single-row facility layout problem. Computational Optimization and Applications, 55(1):1-20, 2013. Google Scholar
  36. Philipp Hungerländer and Franz Rendl. Semidefinite relaxations of ordering problems. Mathematical Programming, 140(1):77-97, 2013. Google Scholar
  37. Zahnupriya Kalita and Dilip Datta. A constrained single-row facility layout problem. The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology, 98(5):2173-2184, 2018. Google Scholar
  38. Timothy Kam. Multi-valued decision diagrams: Theory and applications. Multiple-Valued Logic, 4(1):9-62, 1998. Google Scholar
  39. Richard M. Karp and Michael Held. Finite-state processes and dynamic programming. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 15(3):693-718, 1967. Google Scholar
  40. Ravi Kothari and Diptesh Ghosh. An efficient genetic algorithm for single row facility layout. Optimization Letters, 8(2):679-690, 2014. Google Scholar
  41. K. Ravi Kumar, George C. Hadjinicola, and Ting-li Lin. A heuristic procedure for the single-row facility layout problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 87(1):65-73, 1995. Google Scholar
  42. Yung-Te Lai, Massoud Pedram, and Sarma B. K. Vrudhula. EVBDD-based algorithms for integer linear programming, spectral transformation, and function decomposition. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 13(8):959-975, 1994. Google Scholar
  43. C.-Y. Lee. Representation of switching circuits by binary-decision programs. The Bell System Technical Journal, 38(4):985-999, 1959. Google Scholar
  44. Silu Liu, Zeqiang Zhang, Chao Guan, Lixia Zhu, Min Zhang, and Peng Guo. An improved fireworks algorithm for the constrained single-row facility layout problem. International Journal of Production Research, 59(8):2309-2327, 2021. Google Scholar
  45. Elsa Loekito, James Bailey, and Jian Pei. A binary decision diagram based approach for mining frequent subsequences. Knowledge and Information Systems, 24(2):235-268, 2010. Google Scholar
  46. Robert Love and Jsun Wong. On solving a one-dimensional space allocation problem with integer programming. INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research, 14(2):139-143, 1976. Google Scholar
  47. Gintaras Palubeckis. Single row facility layout using multi-start simulated annealing. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 103:1-16, 2017. Google Scholar
  48. Guillaume Perez and Jean-Charles Régin. Efficient operations on mdds for building constraint programming models. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-15), pages 374-380, 2015. Google Scholar
  49. Jordi Petit. Experiments on the minimum linear arrangement problem. Journal of Experimental Algorithmics, 8, 2003. Google Scholar
  50. Jean-Claude Picard and Maurice Queyranne. On the one-dimensional space allocation problem. Operations Research, 29(2):371-391, 1981. Google Scholar
  51. Hamed Samarghandi and Kourosh Eshghi. An efficient tabu algorithm for the single row facility layout problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 205(1):98-105, 2010. Google Scholar
  52. Donald M. Simmons. One-dimensional space allocation: an ordering algorithm. Operations Research, 17(5):812-826, 1969. Google Scholar
  53. J. K. Suryanarayanan, Bruce L. Golden, and Qi Wang. A new heuristic for the linear placement problem. Computers & Operations Research, 18(3):255-262, 1991. Google Scholar
  54. Willem-Jan van Hoeve. Graph coloring lower bounds from decision diagrams. In International Conference on Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization, pages 405-418. Springer, 2020. Google Scholar
  55. Hélène Verhaeghe, Christophe Lecoutre, and Pierre Schaus. Compact-mdd: Efficiently filtering (s) mdd constraints with reversible sparse bit-sets. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-18), pages 1383-1389, 2018. Google Scholar
  56. Ingo Wegener. Branching programs and binary decision diagrams: Theory and applications. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 2000. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Imprint Privacy Contact