Download
1 / 25
250 likes | 336 Views
Industrial Project (236504). Transportation task planning algorithms ClickSoftware. Students: Noam Lavie, Ori Shalev Supervisors: Israel Beniaminy, Simon Arazi. Introduction.
E N D
Industrial Project (236504) Transportation task planning algorithms ClickSoftware Students: Noam Lavie, Ori Shalev Supervisors: Israel Beniaminy, Simon Arazi
Introduction The operation of a modern transportation systems is extremely complex and it requires coordination between many factors: Regulator Time table Facilities: stations, platforms, ticketing self service kiosks, vending machines Network: railways, electricity supply, signaling, communication Vehicles People: drivers, call center, ticketing, passenger agents, maintenance, control room In this project we are focusing on train drivers and their working arrangement. There are many possible working arrangements, but some are better then others. The optimal arrangement covers the required service level (time table) with the minimal cost (headcount)
Our Objective To develop and test working arrangement algorithms for train drivers. The algorithm receives the train schedule (time table), and output a working arrangement for the drivers. The algorithm should find a valid working arrangement with the minimal headcount.
Methodology There were few methods that we could apply in our project, we took the first few weeks to study the subject a bit: we read material on the internet, consulted with experts from different fields and thought of our on ideas. We built Infrastructures that would help us to solve the problem. We thought and implemented few greedy algorithms. The purposes were having a reference to compare our future results against and have a first feeling of creating a new algorithm and working with the Infrastructures. One of the greedy algorithms was exceptionally better than the others, we decided to keep working with it. Also, it gave us ideas for new , not greedy, algorithms. We built s graphical visualization of the results – that helps us understand the solutions and their results. We created the “framework“ that helped us run (multi-threaded), save and reload different algorithms results. We thought and implemented 5 different algorithms that were based on the first “greedy” algorithm and tried to improve it.
Infrastructures • Input’s parser • Building a graph from the input • The frame-work • Graphical visualization • Apsp • Real data base of cities: coordinates and distances between them.
Graphical solution visualization New features to v3: • Smooth transition • Mouse dragging • floating message box. • Improved zooming capabilities
Multi-core framework • Goals: • Take advantage of the fact • that each random run has no • dependence at any other data. • Boost the throughput of the algorithm runs by x8 relative to single threaded serial running. • Support for “restore from seed” rerun of interesting results.
Building a graph from the input Every leg is displayed in the graph as 4 nodes: Leg’s ID Start time Leg’s ID end time The leg’s from city And the time The leg’s to city And the time
Algorithm’s evolution: • Our first algorithm was the “greedy algorithm” • For every leg in the leg list: • If there is a driver who can take the leg: • Give the leg to the most veteran driver • Apply the possible legs that the driver can take (remove the driver from all the legs he can’t take now) • Else (there isn’t a driver who can drive the leg) • “Create” a new driver and give him the leg • Apply all the possible legs that the driver can take (add the driver to all the future legs he can take)
Algorithm’s evolution: General point about the algorithms: All legs are sorted by starting time After the algorithms finish, we pick the best solution by: First: the solution with the minimal drivers number Second: the solution where drivers finish their work day in minimal distance from their starting day point
Algo No. 1: “Random Break Algo” • The main goal: greediness reduction, make the algo less deterministic • The idea: don’t give the leg to the most veteran driver automatically. Give the leg randomly to one of the possible drivers. Give a veteran driver a higher probability to be chosen. • The algo: • For every leg in the leg list: • If there is a driver who can take the leg: • Sort all possible drivers by their veteran value • Go over the sorted list (from the most veteran driver to the newest), for every driver in the list: • By probability of P, Pick the driver to take the leg (and finish going over the list) • Else (there isn’t a driver who can drive the leg) • “create” a new driver and give him the leg • Apply all the possible legs that the driver can take (add the driver to all the future legs he can take)
Algo No. 2: “Random New Driver Algo” • The main goal: greediness reduction, improve the drivers selection , add a “new driver” opportunity. • The idea: choose a driver from the driver list more “wisely”, beside the opportunity to give the leg to an exist driver: create a chance of giving the leg to a new driver. • Improvements: • Choose driver: every driver has a probability to take the leg related to the total breaks he took so far. • New_driver_probabilty: we want to give a chance to a new driver to get the current leg for some probability. the probability value will be affected by a heuristic function that affected by the next parameters: • drivers_num: the more drivers who can take the leg, the less probability to give the leg to a new driver • reachable_legs: the more reachable legs from the given leg (in the near future), the probability to give the leg to a new driver is higher. • day_time_prob: as the time becomes late there is less probability to “create” a new driver.
Algo No. 2: “Random New Driver Algo” • The algo: • For every leg in the leg list: • If there is a driver who can take the leg: • For some probability depends on a heuristic function – give the leg to a new driver. • Or: • Give the leg to some driver from the list, give higher probability to drivers who already took enough breaks. • Else (there isn’t a driver who can drive the leg) • “Create” a new driver and give him the leg • Apply all the possible legs that the driver can take (add the driver to all the future legs he can take)
Algo No. 3: “repair algo" • The main goal: take a greedy solution and improve it. • The idea: take a given solution, try to solve a small part of it again using the “Random Break Algo” – hopefully that when we combine the new sub solution to the old one, we will get a better solution. • features: • Choose problematic driver: the sub solution that we want to improve is supposed to have a “problematic” driver that we can erase, this feature chooses randomly a “problematic” driver. The shorter the driver’s day plane is the more likely he would be considered problematic and will get higher probability to be chosen.
Algo num 3: “repair algo" The algo: • Take a greedy solution • Chose a “problematic” driver • Take a random radius of time before and after the driver. • Solve again the sub problem for a day that starts and ends in the limited day time within the radius time. • Combine the new sub solution to the old one (replace the shifts of the old solution in the radius time to the shifts of the new solution)
Algo No.4: “Dual greedy algo & matching” • Preface: • Flow network • the Ford-Fulkerson maximum-flow method using residual networks. • maximum bipartite matching using a reduction to max-flow problem. • minimal path covering ( on DAG ).
Algo No.4: “Dual greedy algo” The original greedy algorithm seems to have few drivers left mostly at the end with very little legs to drive. What if we could just reverse the direction of the greedy leg covering and some how merge half greedy and half reversed greedy solution together in a “smart” manner? Reversed greedy algo is the exact opposite of the greedy algo. Is sorted the legs by ending time, and starts it’s covering routine from end to start. Let by all of the legs that need to be covered. With probability cover one leg using the regular greedy algo, otherwise cover one leg with the reversed greedy algo. By the end of the run we will find ourselves with half covered legs by the “front” greedy cover algo, and another half that was covered by the reversed greedy algo.
Algo No.4: “Dual greedy algo” Now we are left with the problem of merging front and back legs into one driver. In order to do that in the best possible way wee will build bipartite graph as follow: where Now all is left is to run the maximum bipartite matching algo in order to find the smallest number of driver to the entire problem. Results: Unfortunately the results weren’t better then the original greedy leg cover algo.
Algo No.5: Break & merge algo Ok, by now we know that merging 2 greedy solution doesn’t help us much. For the following algo we will need to review the minimal path covering problem. Let be a DAG. Path cover of V’s vertices is a group of paths Such that of There is an algorithm for finding minimum path covering using the above bipartite matching algo. We will just use it as a black box algo in order to calculate The minimum path covering of our graph. The algo Let’s take a solution of the greedy algo and break up each driver path into smaller pieces. How small? If there is a break of more then 20 minutes then the path will Be break into 2 separate paths.
Algo No.5: Break & merge algo Now we will build a new graph. For each sub path that we get from breaking the long path we will create a vertex in the graph. Let say driver 1 drove legs 1,2,3,4 and we broke that into legs 1,2 and 3,4 than the path 1,2 will made one vertex , and path 3,4 will made the other one. The edges: Now we will run the minimal path covering algo, this will give us the minimal drivers needed to drive all of the leg all together. So is it an optimal solution? No. the problem is that we don’t know anything about the rest of the path will matching 2 vertex . For example: Leg 1 from 8:00 to 12:00 Leg 2 from 12:00 to14:00 Leg 3 from 14:00 to 19:00 It is legal to connect 1 to 2 and 2 to 3 bit the algo will do it best to find the minimal cover and therefore will match 1 to 2 and 2 to 3 and that path is illegal. Trying to re-break the path into smaller legal paths will end up with solution no better than the original greedy algo.
Achivments • Infrastructures: a wide set of tools that hopefully use for farther work on the project. • Solution visualization, generic multi-threaded “frame-work”, implements of flow’s algorithms. • Five different algorithms. • A “greedy” algorithm that returns good solutions in minimal time.
Conclusions • Unfortunately non of our developed algorithms gave us a significant improvement over the firs “greedy” algorithm. Reasons for that may be: • Maybe the first “greedy” algorithm is not so bad as we think, maybe there is no such difference between the “greedy” results and the best solution results. • Maybe the algorithms can give better solutions on different problems that we didn’t check. • Maybe the main ideas of the algorithms are good, but we made some wrong choices in some of the sub problems along the way. • Maybe the algorithms are just not good enough. • The first “greedy” algorithm can give a reasonable solution in minimum time, therefore it may be used in cases when we need fast answers.
