Kim, J L (2013) Genetic algorithm stopping criteria for optimization of construction resource scheduling problems. Construction Management and Economics, 31(1), pp. 3-19. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Genetic algorithms (GAs) have been widely applied in the civil and construction engineering management research domain to solve difficult and complex problems such as resource-constrained project scheduling problems (RCPSPs). Generally, a trial-and-error calibration approach is used to identify values for the GA parameters. Unlike with other parameters, few studies have been done, theoretically or experimentally, for determining when to terminate GA for optimization of the RCPSP. Two genetic algorithm stopping conditions are compared to demonstrate their suitability for application in the RCPSP and to assess their ability in searching optimal solutions efficiently. The extensive computational results show that the Elitist GA, when using the unique schedule method, provides 10% more optimum values than those obtained from the Elitist GA when using the iteration method with 24% less computational time. The unique schedule stopping approach can be valuable for GA users to design their purpose driven GA for optimization of the RCPSP as it provides a better near-optimal solution with reduced computational time.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | comparative studies; genetic algorithms heuristics; optimization; resource allocation |
| Index terms: | comparative study, construction engineering management, heuristic, project scheduling, resource allocation, resource scheduling, suitability, genetic algorithm |
| Subjects: | algorithms, research design and methodology, project management theory and practice, operations research, risk assessment, project controls, design criteria, resource management |
| Topics: | Project Management, Time Control, Site Management, Risk Management, Research Practice, Design Practice, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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