Chan, W T; Chua, D K H and Kannan, G (1996) Construction resource scheduling with genetic algorithms. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 122(2), pp. 125-132. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
A new approach for resource scheduling using genetic algorithms (GAs) is presented here. The methodology does not depend on any set of heuristic rules. Instead, its strength lies in the selection and recom-bination tasks of the GA to learn the domain of the specific project network. By this it is able to evolve improved schedules with respect to the objective function. Further, the model is general enough to encompass both resource leveling and limited resource allocation problems unlike existing methods, which are class-dependent. In this paper, the design and mechanisms of the model are described. Case studies with standard test problems are presented to demonstrate the performance of the GA-scheduler when compared against heuristic methods under various resource availability profiles. Results obtained with the proposed model do not indicate an exponential growth in the computational time required for larger problems.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | methodology, scheduler, project network, genetic algorithm, resource allocation, heuristic, case study, resource levelling, resource scheduling |
| Subjects: | practitioner, data collection methods, risk assessment, resource management, project planning, operations research, algorithms, research methods |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Time Control, Site Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Risk Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here