Comparisons of Genetic Algorithms for Timetabling Problems Hiroaki UEDA, Daisuke OUCHI, Kenichi TAKAHASHI, and Tetsuhiro MIYAHARA GA GA GA GA GA SGA GA SGA2SA TS 6 SGA2 GA GA SA 1. GA [1] [12] GA Faculty of Information Sciences, Hiroshima City University, Hiroshima-shi, 731 3194 Japan Compaq Computer K.K, Utsunomiya-shi, 320 0811 Japan GA GA GA [3] GA [4] D I Vol. J86 D I No. 9 pp. 691 701 2003 9 691
2003/9 Vol. J86 D I No. 9 GA GA [8] [10] GA GA GA SGA GA SGA2 SA TS 6 2. 3. GA 4 4. 2. 1 10 20 1 1 5 C1: C2: C3: 1 C4: C5: 692
4 C6: C7: C8: C9: C6 C7 2 C8 C9 4 R1: R2: R3: R4: 9 4 GA GA SGA SGA2 4.4 0 3. GA 3. 1 GA 2 GA [8] [10] GA 1 SI ID C i R j 2 GA GA 2 (a) The genotype for class scheduling. (b) The genotype for room allocation. 1 Fig. 1 The genotype. 693
2003/9 Vol. J86 D I No. 9 Table 1 1 An example of a timetable before the repair operation. Class Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Subject-1 Subject-5 Subject-6 A-1 Staff-1 Staff-5 Staff-5 Subject-2 Subject-7 B-1 Staff-2 Staff-6 and Staff-7 Subject-3 Subject-1 C-1 Staff-3 Staff-1 Subject-1 Subject-4 Subject-2 Subject-8 D-1 Staff-1 Staff-4 Staff-2 Staff-3 2 GA Fig. 2 A flow diagram of TGA. 1 <C i,r j > 2 1 C2 C2 3 SI SI (S 1) S 1 SI (S 2) S 2 C3 S 2 S 1 SI S 1 1 D-1 Subject-1 S 1 Subject-2 D-1 Subject-4 Subject-8 S 2 Subject-2 S 1 SI Subject-1 Subject-4 Subject-2 4 C2 1. n c C nc + c 2. 3. S {p 1,p 2,..., p c} 694
2 Table 2 An example of a timetable after the repair operation. Class Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Subject-5 Subject-1 Subject-6 A-1 Staff-5 Staff-1 Staff-5 Subject-2 Subject-7 B-1 Staff-2 Staff-6 and Staff-7 Subject-3 Subject-1 C-1 Staff-3 Staff-1 Subject-2 Subject-1 Subject-4 Subject-8 D-1 Staff-2 Staff-1 Staff-4 Staff-3 4. p i S p i p i S S 1 Subject-1 Subject-2 Subject- 1 Subject-2 1 4+3 = 7 2 4+2 = 10 Subject-2 Subject-2 Period1 2 / Subject-1 Period2 Subject-2 Subject-1 Period3 2 5 C i CC(C i) CC(C i) C1-3 C6 C8 R1-3 C i 6 7 R j RC(R j) RC(R j) R j C4 C5 C9 R4 RCC(C i,r j) RCC(C i,r j) CC(C i) RC(R j) 1. CC(C i) N RC(R j) M 2. 1 RCC(C i,r j) 3. (1) (2) CC(C i) (3) fitness(c i) CC(C i) CC(C i) + min(rcc(c i,r j)) (1) j CC(C i) CC(C i) + average(min(rcc(c k,r j))) k j + std(min(rcc(c k,r j))) (2) k j fitness(c i) = max(cc(c k )) CC(C i) (3) k (1) 1 C i (2) C i min() average() std() max() CC(C i)+rc(r j) 0 <C i,r j > 3. 2 GA GA SGA SGA GA 695
2003/9 Vol. J86 D I No. 9 (4) Cost(i) i fitness(i) = max(cost(k)) Cost(i) (4) k 3. 3 GA GA GA GA 1. C1-3 C6 C8 R1-3 CC(C i) (3) CC(C i) 0 2 2. RC (R j) 1 R j C4 C5 C9 R4 RC (R j) 0 3. 4 3 GA SGA SGA2 SGA2 4. 4. 1 3. 4 1 696
2. C6-9 1. 1 2. 1 3. 4. 2 0.8 0.2 1 N N 1 2 2 1 4. 2 3 HCU 97 697
2003/9 Vol. J86 D I No. 9 3 Table 3Timetabling problems. HCU 97 NC NL NCL NR NCR 4 20 4 4 4 4 0.48 0.68 0.89 0.69 0.67 0.69 0.19 0.16 0.230.40 0.18 0.24 0.49 0.19 0.230.40 0.19 0.22 0.5 2.41 2.47 2.45 9.9 2.46 127 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 4 Table 4 Penalty values for room allocation. 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.2 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.0 5 4 3 1 5 0.7 0.2 2.5 4 0 NC the Number of Classes 20 60 NL the Number of Lectures 0.9 NCL the Number of Complex Lectures 0.4 NR the Number of Rooms 12.5 NCR the Number of Constraints or Requests 3 NR 12.5 9.9 C4 1 C4 4 0.1 1 1 Subject-2 C2 2 2 2 (2 1) 2=2 4. 3 3. 4 C Sun Ultra10 333 MHz 100 100% 1% 500 GA 10 HCU 97 NC 30000 5 50 698
5 Table 5 Experimental results. GA SGA GA SGA2 SA TS HCU 97 1.2 (92.0s) 1.9 (187s) 1.5 (66.0s) 0.3(25.0s) 0.4 (20.2s) 14.0 (80.2s) NC 10.6 (10.4h) 15.4 (11.2h) 0.0 (2.4h) 0.0 (1.1h) 36.0 (2.7h) NL 0.0 (8.5s) 0.0 (27.6s) 0.0 (8.4s) 0.0 (3.7s) 0.0 (25.8s) 3.0 (289s) NCL 0.0 (13.5s) 0.0 (4.1s) 0.0 (26.8s) 0.0 (2.3s) 0.02 (13.0s) 7.5 (132s) NR 0.5 (235s) 2.5 (298s) 3.6 (148s) 0.0 (5.0s) 0.0 (11.6s) 4.00 (80.5s) NCR 0.18 (613s) 0.41 (611s) 0.50 (597s) 0.19 (503s) 0.10 (239s) 1.64 (352s) SA TS SA adapitve cooling reheating [11] 30 NC 5 GA 4 SA SI TS 2 + /2 30 TS GA 4 HCU 97 GA 4 TS TS SA HCU 97 0 GA 37 SGA 17 GA 12 SGA2 46 SA 45 TS 0 SGA2 SA GA 70% SGA2 SA 4 GA SGA TS 4 TS TS SGA2 GA NC GA SGA2 NC GA GA SGA SA 0 TS 24 13 TS NC 5 NL TS NL GA GA SGA2 GA SGA SA NCL TS NCL / 699
2003/9 Vol. J86 D I No. 9 SGA SGA2 NR SGA2 SA GA C4 GA GA 50% SGA2 SA NCR 0 GA SGA2 SA NCR 0 HCU 97 0 GA SGA2 SA 70% 0 0 NCR 4. 4 GA SGA GA SGA2 SA TS SGA2 C10: C11: SGA2 5 SGA2 C10 C11 SGA2 5 SA GA GA 5. 4 4 SGA2 GA GA 700
[1] M. Mitchell, An Introduction to Genetic Algorithm, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1998. [2] M.W. Carter and G. Laporte, Recent developments in practical course timetabling, ed. E. Burke and M. Carter, The practice and theory of automated timetabling: Selected papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.1408, pp.3 19, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1998. [3] (D-I), vol.j82-d-i, no.6, pp.883 885, June 1998. [4] D.C. Rich, A smart genetic algorithm for university timetabling, ed. E. Burke and R. Ross, The practice and theory of automated timetabling: Selected papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.1153, pp.181 197, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996. [5] W. Erben and J. Keppler, A genetic algorithm solving a weekly course-timetabling problem, ed. E. Burke and P. Ross, The practice and theory of automated timetabling: Selected papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.1153, pp.198 211, Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 1996. [6] E. Burke and J-P. Newall, Multi-stage evolutionary algorithm for timetable problem, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., pp.1085 1092, 1999. [7] B. Peachter, R.C. Rankin, and A. Cumming, Improving a lecture timetabling system for universitywide use, ed. E. Burke and M. Carter, The practice and theory of automated timetabling: Selected papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.1408, pp.156 165, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1998. [8] AI-99-53, 1999. [9] H. Ueda, D. Ouchi, K. Takahashi, and T. Miyahara, Co-evolving timeslot/room assignment genetic algorithm technique for university timetabling, ed. E. Burke and W. Erben, The practice and theory of automated timetabling: Selected papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.2079, pp.48 63, Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 2001. [10] 11 pp.473 476, 2001. [11] M.A.S. Elmohamed, P. Coddington, and G. Fox, A comparison of annealing techniques for academic course scheduling, ed. E. Burke and M. Carter, The practice and theory of automated timetabling: Selected papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.1408, pp.92 112, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1998. [12] K.A. Dowsland, Off-the-peg or made-to-measure? Timetabling and scheduling with SA and TS, ed. E. Burke and M. Carter, The practice and theory of automated timetabling: Selected papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.1408, pp.37 52, Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 1998. 14 10 11 15 2 24 2 4 7 IEEE 10 12 52 54 62 6 IEEE 59 61 63 63 8 8 701