skip to main content
10.1145/3071178.3071304acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Improving an exact solver for the traveling salesman problem using partition crossover

Published:01 July 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

The best known exact solver for generating provably optimal solutions to the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) is the Concorde algorithm. Concorde uses a branch and bound search strategy, as well as cutting planes to reduce the search space. The first step in using Concorde is to obtain a good initial solution. A good solution can be generated using a heuristic solver outside of Concorde, or Concorde can generate its own initial solution using the Chained Lin Kernighan (LK) algorithm. In this paper, we speed up Concorde by improving the initial solutions produced by Chained LK using Partition Crossover. Partition Crossover is a powerful deterministic recombination operator that is able to tunnel between local optima. In every instance we examined, the addition of recombination resulted in an average speed-up of Concorde, and in the majority of cases, the difference in the runtime costs was statistically significant.

References

  1. F. Ahammed and P. Moscato. Evolving l-systems as an intelligent design approach to find classes of difficult-to-solve traveling salesman problem instances. In Applications of Evolutionary Computation: EvoApplications, pages 1--11. Springer, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. D. Applegate, W. Cook, and A. Rohe. Chained lin-kernighan for large traveling salesman problems. INFORMS J. on Computing, 15(1):82--92, Jan. 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. D. L. Applegate, R. E. Bixby, V. Chvatal, and W. J. Cook. Concorde-03.12.19, 2003. http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/tsp/data/index.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. W. Cook and P. Seymour. Tour merging via branch-decomposition. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 15(3):233--248, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. W.J. Cook. TSP test data, accessed October 24, 2016. http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/tsp/data/index.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. D. Hains, D. Whitley, and A. Howe. Improving lin-kernighan-helsgaun with crossover on clustered instances of the TSP. In Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, PPSN'12, pages 388--397, 2012. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. K. Helsgaun. General k-opt submoves for the lin-kernighan tsp heuristic. Mathematical Programming Computation, 1(2):119--163, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. S. Hougardy and R. T. Schroeder. Edge elimination in tsp instances. In D. Kratsch and I. Todinca, editors, Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science, pages 275--286. Springer, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. S. Lin and B. W. Kernighan. An effective heuristic algorithm for the traveling-salesman problem. Oper. Res., 21(2):498--516, Apr. 1973. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. O. Martin, S. Otto, and E. Felten. Large-step markov chains for the tsp incorporating local search heuristics. Operations Research Letters, 11:219--224, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. A. Möbius, B. Freisleben, P. Merz, and M. Schreiber. Combinatorial optimization by iterative partial transcription. Physycal Review E, 59(4):4667--4674, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. G. Ochoa and N. Veerapen. Additional dimensions to the study of funnels in combinatorial landscapes. In Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference 2016, GECCO '16, pages 373--380, 2016. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. N. Radcliffe and P. Surry. Fitness variance of formae and performance predictions. In D. Whitley and M. Vose, editors, Foundations of Genetic Algorithms 3, pages 51--72. Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. G. Reinelt. TSPLIB 95, accessed October 24, 2016. http://comopt.ifi.uni-heidelberg.de/software/TSPLIB95/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. D. Sanches, D. Whitley, and R. Tinós. Building a better heuristic for the traveling salesman problem: Combining edge assembly crossover and partition crossover. In Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference GECCO, 2017. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. R. Tinos, D. Whitley, and F. Chicano. Partition crossover for pseudo-boolean optimization. In Foundations of genetic algorithms, (FOGA-15), pages 137--149, 2015. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. R. Tinós, D. Whitley, and G. Ochoa. Generalized asymmetric partition crossover (GAPX) for the asymmetric tsp. In Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, GECCO '14, pages 501--508, 2014. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. D. Whitley, D. Hains, and A. Howe. Tunneling between optima: Partition crossover for the traveling salesman problem. In Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, GECCO '09, pages 915--922, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. D. Whitley, D. Hains, and A. Howe. A hybrid genetic algorithm for the traveling salesman problem using generalized partition crossover. In Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, PPSN'10, pages 566--575, 2010. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Improving an exact solver for the traveling salesman problem using partition crossover

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          GECCO '17: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
          July 2017
          1427 pages
          ISBN:9781450349208
          DOI:10.1145/3071178

          Copyright © 2017 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 1 July 2017

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          GECCO '17 Paper Acceptance Rate178of462submissions,39%Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

          Upcoming Conference

          GECCO '24
          Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
          July 14 - 18, 2024
          Melbourne , VIC , Australia

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader