IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sot/journl/y2010i46p36-51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A community of agents as a tool to optimize industrial districts logistics

Author

Listed:
  • Tiso, Annamaria
  • Dell'Orco, Mauro
  • Sassanelli, Domenico

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to find an optimal solution to operational planning of freight transportation in an industrial district. We propose a system architecture that drives agents - the industrial district firms - to cooperate in logistic field, to minimize transport and environmental costs. The idea is to achieve logistics optimization setting up a community made of district enterprises, preserving a satisfactory level of system efficiency and fairness. We address the situation in which a virtual coordinator helps the agents to reach an agreement. The objectives are: maximizing customer’s satisfaction, and minimizing the number of trucks needed. A fuzzy clustering (FCM), two Fuzzy Inference System (FIS) combined with a Genetic Algorithm (GA), and a greedy algorithm is thus proposed to achieve these objectives, and eventually an algorithm to solve the Travelling Salesman Problem is also used. The proposed framework can be used to provide real time solutions to logistics management problems, and negative environmental impacts.

Suggested Citation

  • Tiso, Annamaria & Dell'Orco, Mauro & Sassanelli, Domenico, 2010. "A community of agents as a tool to optimize industrial districts logistics," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 46, pages 36-51.
    • Handle: RePEc:sot:journl:y:2010:i:46:p:36-51
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10077/6164
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heiskanen, Pirja & Ehtamo, Harri & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2001. "Constraint proposal method for computing Pareto solutions in multi-party negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 44-61, August.
    2. P. Korhonen, 1998. "Multiple Objective Programming Support," Working Papers ir98010, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. A.P. Wierzbicki, 1998. "Reference Point Methods in Vector Optimization and Decision Support," Working Papers ir98017, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    2. Arbel, Ami & Korhonen, Pekka, 2001. "Using objective values to start multiple objective linear programming algorithms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(3), pages 587-596, February.
    3. Guangquan Zhang & Jie Lu, 2003. "An Integrated Group Decision-Making Method Dealing with Fuzzy Preferences for Alternatives and Individual Judgments for Selection Criteria," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(6), pages 501-515, November.
    4. Gratiela Ghic, 2010. "The Importance of the Cost Information in Making Decisions," Knowledge Horizons - Economics, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 2(4), pages 44-50, December.
    5. Ronghuo Zheng & Tinglong Dai & Katia Sycara & Nilanjan Chakraborty, 2016. "Automated Multilateral Negotiation on Multiple Issues with Private Information," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 612-628, November.
    6. Anders Clausen & Aisha Umair & Yves Demazeau & Bo Nørregaard Jørgensen, 2020. "Impact of Social Welfare Metrics on Energy Allocation in Multi-Objective Optimization," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.
    7. P. Korhonen & A. Siljamaeki & M. Soismaa, 1998. "Practical Aspects of Value Efficiency Analysis," Working Papers ir98042, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    8. Halme, Merja & Korhonen, Pekka, 2000. "Restricting weights in value efficiency analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 175-188, October.
    9. T. Joro, 1998. "Models for Identifying Target Units in Data Envelopment Analysis: Comparison and Extension," Working Papers ir98055, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    10. P. Korhonen, 1997. "Searching the Efficient Frontier in Data Envelopment Analysis," Working Papers ir97079, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    11. Nicolas Quérou & Patrick Rio & Mabel Tidball, 2007. "Multi-Party Negotiation When Agents Have Subjective Estimates of Bargaining Powers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 417-436, September.
    12. Louta, Malamati & Roussaki, Ioanna & Pechlivanos, Lambros, 2008. "An intelligent agent negotiation strategy in the electronic marketplace environment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(3), pages 1327-1345, June.
    13. Francisco J. André & Inés Herrero & Laura Riesgo, 2007. "Using a modified DEA model to estimate the importance of objectives. An application to agricultural economics," Working Papers 07.09, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    14. Pirja Heiskanen, 2001. "Generating Pareto‐optimal boundary points in multiparty negotiations using constraint proposal method," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 210-225, April.
    15. M.A. Quaddus & M.A.B. Siddique, 1994. "Multiobjective Decision Support in Development Planning," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 94-01, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    16. Harri Ehtamo & Raimo P. Hämäläinen, 2001. "Interactive Multiple‐Criteria Methods for Reaching Pareto Optimal Agreements in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 475-491, November.
    17. Ivan Marsa-Maestre & Miguel A. Lopez-Carmona & Juan A. Carral & Guillermo Ibanez, 2013. "A Recursive Protocol for Negotiating Contracts Under Non-monotonic Preference Structures," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-43, January.
    18. Lou, Youcheng & Wang, Shouyang, 2016. "Approximate representation of the Pareto frontier in multiparty negotiations: Decentralized methods and privacy preservation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(3), pages 968-976.
    19. Tommi Gustafsson & Ahti Salo & Ramakrishnan Ramanathan, 2003. "Multicriteria methods for technology foresight," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2-3), pages 235-255.
    20. Francisco J. André & Inés Herrero & Laura Riesgo, 2004. "Using DEA to estimate the importance of objectives for decision makers," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/50, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sot:journl:y:2010:i:46:p:36-51. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Romeo Danielis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/xxxxxxx.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.