IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v296y2021i1d10.1007_s10479-019-03435-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Solving bi-objective uncertain stochastic resource allocation problems by the CVaR-based risk measure and decomposition-based multi-objective evolutionary algorithms

Author

Listed:
  • Juan Li

    (Beijing Institute of Technology)

  • Bin Xin

    (Beijing Institute of Technology
    Beijing Institute of Technology
    Beijing Institute of Technology)

  • Panos M. Pardalos

    (University of Florida)

  • Jie Chen

    (Beijing Institute of Technology
    Beijing Institute of Technology
    Beijing Institute of Technology)

Abstract

This paper investigates the uncertain stochastic resource allocation problem in which the results of a given allocation of resources are described as probabilities and these probabilities are considered to be uncertain from practical aspects. Here uncertainties are introduced by assuming that these probabilities depend on random parameters which are impacted by various factors. The redundancy allocation problem (RAP) and the multi-stage weapon-target assignment (MWTA) problem are special cases of stochastic resource allocation problems. Bi-objective models for the uncertain RAP and MWTA problem in which the conditional value-at-risk measure is used to control the risk brought by uncertainties are presented in this paper. The bi-objective formulation covers the objectives of minimizing the risk of failure of completing activities and the resulting cost of resources. With the aim of determining referenced Pareto fronts, a linearized formulation and an approximated linear formulation are put forward for RAPs and MWTA problems based on problem-specific characteristics, respectively. Two state-of-the-art decomposition-based multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (i.e., MOEA/D-AWA and DMOEA- $$\varepsilon \hbox {C}$$ ε C ) are used to solve the formulated bi-objective problem. In view of differences between MOEA/D-AWA and DMOEA- $$\varepsilon \hbox {C}$$ ε C , two matching schemes inspired by DMOEA- $$\varepsilon \hbox {C}$$ ε C are proposed and embedded in MOEA/D-AWA. Numerical experiments have been performed on a set of uncertain RAP and MWTA instances. Experimental results demonstrate that DMOEA- $$\varepsilon \hbox {C}$$ ε C outperforms MOEA/D-AWA on the majority of test instances and the superiority of DMOEA- $$\varepsilon \hbox {C}$$ ε C can be ascribed to the $$\varepsilon $$ ε -constraint framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan Li & Bin Xin & Panos M. Pardalos & Jie Chen, 2021. "Solving bi-objective uncertain stochastic resource allocation problems by the CVaR-based risk measure and decomposition-based multi-objective evolutionary algorithms," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 639-666, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:296:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-019-03435-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-019-03435-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-019-03435-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-019-03435-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard H. Day, 1966. "Allocating Weapons to Target Complexes by Means of Nonlinear Programming," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 992-1013, December.
    2. Huang, Chia-Ling, 2015. "A particle-based simplified swarm optimization algorithm for reliability redundancy allocation problems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 221-230.
    3. Ravindra K. Ahuja & Arvind Kumar & Krishna C. Jha & James B. Orlin, 2007. "Exact and Heuristic Algorithms for the Weapon-Target Assignment Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 1136-1146, December.
    4. Marco Caserta & Stefan Voß, 2016. "A corridor method based hybrid algorithm for redundancy allocation," Journal of Heuristics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 405-429, August.
    5. G. G. denBroeder & R. E. Ellison & L. Emerling, 1959. "On Optimum Target Assignments," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 322-326, June.
    6. Alan S. Manne, 1958. "A Target-Assignment Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 346-351, June.
    7. Li, Xiang & Qin, Zhongfeng & Kar, Samarjit, 2010. "Mean-variance-skewness model for portfolio selection with fuzzy returns," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(1), pages 239-247, April.
    8. Xiaoyan Zhu & Way Kuo, 2014. "Importance measures in reliability and mathematical programming," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 212(1), pages 241-267, January.
    9. Li, Zhaojun & Liao, Haitao & Coit, David W., 2009. "A two-stage approach for multi-objective decision making with applications to system reliability optimization," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(10), pages 1585-1592.
    10. Khalili-Damghani, Kaveh & Amiri, Maghsoud, 2012. "Solving binary-state multi-objective reliability redundancy allocation series-parallel problem using efficient epsilon-constraint, multi-start partial bound enumeration algorithm, and DEA," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 35-44.
    11. Sung, C. S. & Cho, Y. K., 2000. "Reliability optimization of a series system with multiple-choice and budget constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 159-171, November.
    12. Nasim Dehghan Hardoroudi & Abolfazl Keshvari & Markku Kallio & Pekka Korhonen, 2017. "Solving cardinality constrained mean-variance portfolio problems via MILP," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 254(1), pages 47-59, July.
    13. Konstantin Pavlikov & Stan Uryasev, 2018. "CVaR distance between univariate probability distributions and approximation problems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 262(1), pages 67-88, March.
    14. Taboada, Heidi A. & Baheranwala, Fatema & Coit, David W. & Wattanapongsakorn, Naruemon, 2007. "Practical solutions for multi-objective optimization: An application to system reliability design problems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 314-322.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gaoke Wu & Bo Feng & Libin Guo, 2021. "Optimal Procurement Strategy for Supply Chain with Trade Credit and Backorder under CVaR Criterion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-16, September.

    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. Alexander G. Kline & Darryl K. Ahner & Brian J. Lunday, 2019. "Real-time heuristic algorithms for the static weapon target assignment problem," Journal of Heuristics, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 377-397, June.
    2. Alexandre Colaers Andersen & Konstantin Pavlikov & Túlio A. M. Toffolo, 2022. "Weapon-target assignment problem: exact and approximate solution algorithms," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 312(2), pages 581-606, May.
    3. Davis, Michael T. & Robbins, Matthew J. & Lunday, Brian J., 2017. "Approximate dynamic programming for missile defense interceptor fire control," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(3), pages 873-886.
    4. Chan Y. Han & Brian J. Lunday & Matthew J. Robbins, 2016. "A Game Theoretic Model for the Optimal Location of Integrated Air Defense System Missile Batteries," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 405-416, August.
    5. Hughes, Michael S. & Lunday, Brian J., 2022. "The Weapon Target Assignment Problem: Rational Inference of Adversary Target Utility Valuations from Observed Solutions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Lu, Yiping & Chen, Danny Z., 2021. "A new exact algorithm for the Weapon-Target Assignment problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    7. Anissa Frini & Adel Guitouni & Abderrezak Benaskeur, 2017. "Solving Dynamic Multi-Criteria Resource-Target Allocation Problem Under Uncertainty: A Comparison of Decomposition and Myopic Approaches," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(06), pages 1465-1496, November.
    8. Khalili-Damghani, Kaveh & Abtahi, Amir-Reza & Tavana, Madjid, 2013. "A new multi-objective particle swarm optimization method for solving reliability redundancy allocation problems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 58-75.
    9. Dolatshahi-Zand, Ali & Khalili-Damghani, Kaveh, 2015. "Design of SCADA water resource management control center by a bi-objective redundancy allocation problem and particle swarm optimization," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 11-21.
    10. Alexander G. Kline & Darryl K. Ahner & Brian J. Lunday, 2020. "A heuristic and metaheuristic approach to the static weapon target assignment problem," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 78(4), pages 791-812, December.
    11. Zaretalab, Arash & Sharifi, Mani & Guilani, Pedram Pourkarim & Taghipour, Sharareh & Niaki, Seyed Taghi Akhavan, 2022. "A multi-objective model for optimizing the redundancy allocation, component supplier selection, and reliable activities for multi-state systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    12. Safari, Jalal, 2012. "Multi-objective reliability optimization of series-parallel systems with a choice of redundancy strategies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 10-20.
    13. Zhang, Enze & Wu, Yifei & Chen, Qingwei, 2014. "A practical approach for solving multi-objective reliability redundancy allocation problems using extended bare-bones particle swarm optimization," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 65-76.
    14. Ojeong Kwon & Donghan Kang & Kyungsik Lee & Sungsoo Park, 1999. "Lagrangian relaxation approach to the targeting problem," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(6), pages 640-653, September.
    15. Fiondella, Lance & Lin, Yi-Kuei & Pham, Hoang & Chang, Ping-Chen & Li, Chendong, 2017. "A confidence-based approach to reliability design considering correlated failures," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 102-114.
    16. Khalili-Damghani, Kaveh & Amiri, Maghsoud, 2012. "Solving binary-state multi-objective reliability redundancy allocation series-parallel problem using efficient epsilon-constraint, multi-start partial bound enumeration algorithm, and DEA," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 35-44.
    17. Petchrompo, Sanyapong & Wannakrairot, Anupong & Parlikad, Ajith Kumar, 2022. "Pruning Pareto optimal solutions for multi-objective portfolio asset management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(1), pages 203-220.
    18. Kayedpour, Farjam & Amiri, Maghsoud & Rafizadeh, Mahmoud & Shahryari Nia, Arash, 2017. "Multi-objective redundancy allocation problem for a system with repairable components considering instantaneous availability and strategy selection," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 11-20.
    19. Zhang, Enze & Chen, Qingwei, 2016. "Multi-objective reliability redundancy allocation in an interval environment using particle swarm optimization," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 83-92.
    20. Behzad Karimi & Seyed Taghi Akhavan Niaki & Seyyed Masih Miriha & Mahsa Ghare Hasanluo & Shima Javanmard, 2019. "A weighted K-means clustering approach to solve the redundancy allocation problem of systems having components with different failures," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 233(6), pages 925-942, December.

    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:spr:annopr:v:296:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-019-03435-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.