IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joheur/v31y2025i2d10.1007_s10732-025-09554-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hybrid algorithms for enhanced efficiency and scalability of network-based tri-level interdiction models

Author

Listed:
  • Nafiseh Ghorbani-Renani

    (Stevens Institute of Technology)

  • Andrés D. González

    (University of Oklahoma)

  • Kash Barker

    (University of Oklahoma)

Abstract

This study focuses on optimizing resilience strategies for interdependent infrastructure networks (e.g., electric power, water supply, transportation system) against intelligent attacks. We formulate this problem as a tri-level defender-attacker-defender (DAD) model, which is known for its computational complexity. To address this challenge, we propose two novel hybrid decomposition-based algorithms: the hybrid Benders decomposition-based (HBD) algorithm and the hybrid set covering-based (HSC) algorithm. These algorithms efficiently solve the nested subproblems (master problem and subproblem) of the tri-level DAD formulation, incorporating metaheuristic algorithms for improved performance. The proposed algorithms are applied to a tri-level protection-interdiction-restoration model to optimize network resilience. Two case studies are used to evaluate the effectiveness of the solution techniques: (i) An interdependent system of water, gas, and power networks with 125 nodes and 164 links, and (ii) A simulated system of two networks with 252 nodes and 507 links. Our results demonstrate that both hybrid algorithms offer high-quality solutions with significantly improved computational efficiency compared to the existing exact solution method based on the set covering approach. In our comparison across different case studies and budget scenarios, we find that for higher budget scenarios, the HBD algorithm outperforms the HSC algorithm and is more computationally efficient. For lower budget scenarios, the performance of both algorithms is similar, with the HSC algorithm showing slightly better performance in terms of computational speed. Both algorithms show clear advantages over the set covering (CD) approach, particularly when available budget grows. This study highlights that the choice between the HBD and HSC algorithms depends on both the case study size and available budget, with the HBD algorithm being preferable in higher budget scenarios and the HSC algorithm being slightly more efficient in lower budget scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • Nafiseh Ghorbani-Renani & Andrés D. González & Kash Barker, 2025. "Hybrid algorithms for enhanced efficiency and scalability of network-based tri-level interdiction models," Journal of Heuristics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 1-43, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joheur:v:31:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10732-025-09554-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10732-025-09554-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10732-025-09554-5
    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/s10732-025-09554-5?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. Sachuer Bao & Chi Zhang & Min Ouyang & Lixin Miao, 2019. "An integrated tri-level model for enhancing the resilience of facilities against intentional attacks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 87-117, December.
    2. Hunt, Kyle & Zhuang, Jun, 2024. "A review of attacker-defender games: Current state and paths forward," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 401-417.
    3. Smith, J. Cole & Song, Yongjia, 2020. "A survey of network interdiction models and algorithms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(3), pages 797-811.
    4. Yuan, Wei & Zhao, Long & Zeng, Bo, 2014. "Optimal power grid protection through a defender–attacker–defender model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 83-89.
    5. Wu, Yipeng & Chen, Zhilong & Gong, Huadong & Feng, Qilin & Chen, Yicun & Tang, Haizhou, 2021. "Defender–attacker–operator: Tri-level game-theoretic interdiction analysis of urban water distribution networks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    6. Sharkey, Thomas C. & Cavdaroglu, Burak & Nguyen, Huy & Holman, Jonathan & Mitchell, John E. & Wallace, William A., 2015. "Interdependent network restoration: On the value of information-sharing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(1), pages 309-321.
    7. Richard Wollmer, 1964. "Removing Arcs from a Network," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(6), pages 934-940, December.
    8. Laura McLay & Jamie Lloyd & Emily Niman, 2011. "Interdicting nuclear material on cargo containers using knapsack problem models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 185-205, July.
    9. Almoghathawi, Yasser & Barker, Kash & Albert, Laura A., 2019. "Resilience-driven restoration model for interdependent infrastructure networks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 12-23.
    10. Ghorbani-Renani, Nafiseh & González, Andrés D. & Barker, Kash & Morshedlou, Nazanin, 2020. "Protection-interdiction-restoration: Tri-level optimization for enhancing interdependent network resilience," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    11. Ouyang, Min, 2017. "A mathematical framework to optimize resilience of interdependent critical infrastructure systems under spatially localized attacks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(3), pages 1072-1084.
    12. Vladimir Stozhkov & Vladimir Boginski & Oleg A. Prokopyev & Eduardo L. Pasiliao, 2017. "A simple greedy heuristic for linear assignment interdiction," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 249(1), pages 39-53, February.
    13. Gerald Brown & Matthew Carlyle & Javier Salmerón & Kevin Wood, 2006. "Defending Critical Infrastructure," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 530-544, December.
    14. Losada, Chaya & Scaparra, M. Paola & O’Hanley, Jesse R., 2012. "Optimizing system resilience: A facility protection model with recovery time," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 217(3), pages 519-530.
    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. Ghorbani-Renani, Nafiseh & González, Andrés D. & Barker, Kash & Morshedlou, Nazanin, 2020. "Protection-interdiction-restoration: Tri-level optimization for enhancing interdependent network resilience," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    2. Oster, Matthew R. & Amburg, Ilya & Chatterjee, Samrat & Eisenberg, Daniel A. & Thomas, Dennis G. & Pan, Feng & Ganguly, Auroop R., 2024. "A tri-level optimization model for interdependent infrastructure network resilience against compound hazard events," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    3. Bellè, Andrea & Abdin, Adam F. & Fang, Yi-Ping & Zeng, Zhiguo & Barros, Anne, 2023. "A resilience-based framework for the optimal coupling of interdependent critical infrastructures," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    4. Kuttler, Emma & Ghorbani-Renani, Nafiseh & Barker, Kash & González, Andrés D. & Johansson, Jonas, 2024. "Protection-interdiction-restoration for resilient multi-commodity networks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    5. Bellè, Andrea & Abdin, Adam F. & Fang, Yi-Ping & Zeng, Zhiguo & Barros, Anne, 2023. "A data-driven distributionally robust approach for the optimal coupling of interdependent critical infrastructures under random failures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(2), pages 872-889.
    6. Hao, Yucheng & Jia, Limin & Zio, Enrico & Wang, Yanhui & Small, Michael & Li, Man, 2023. "Improving resilience of high-speed train by optimizing repair strategies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    7. Han, Lin & Zhao, Xudong & Chen, Zhilong & Gong, Huadong & Hou, Benwei, 2021. "Assessing resilience of urban lifeline networks to intentional attacks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    8. Li, Qing & Li, Mingchu & Tian, Yuan & Gan, Jianyuan, 2023. "A risk-averse tri-level stochastic model for locating and recovering facilities against attacks in an uncertain environment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    9. Li, Qing & Li, Mingchu & Gong, Zhongqiang & Tian, Yuan & Zhang, Runfa, 2022. "Locating and protecting interdependent facilities to hedge against multiple non-cooperative limited choice attackers," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    10. Fang, Yi-Ping & Zio, Enrico, 2019. "An adaptive robust framework for the optimization of the resilience of interdependent infrastructures under natural hazards," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(3), pages 1119-1136.
    11. Yan, Xihong & Ren, Xiaorong & Nie, Xiaofeng, 2022. "A budget allocation model for domestic airport network protection," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PB).
    12. Canbilen Sütiçen, Tuğçe & Batun, Sakine & Çelik, Melih, 2023. "Integrated reinforcement and repair of interdependent infrastructure networks under disaster-related uncertainties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 308(1), pages 369-384.
    13. Smith, J. Cole & Song, Yongjia, 2020. "A survey of network interdiction models and algorithms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(3), pages 797-811.
    14. Jiang, J. & Liu, X., 2018. "Multi-objective Stackelberg game model for water supply networks against interdictions with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(3), pages 920-933.
    15. Sarhadi, Hassan & Tulett, David M. & Verma, Manish, 2017. "An analytical approach to the protection planning of a rail intermodal terminal network," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(2), pages 511-525.
    16. Zhou, Jun & Zhu, Jiaxing & Liang, Guangchuan & Ma, Junjie & He, Jiayi & Du, Penghua & Ye, Zhanpeng, 2024. "Three-layer and robust planning models to evaluate the strategies of defense layer, attack layer, and operation layer for optimal protection in natural gas pipeline network," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    17. Chaya Losada & M. Scaparra & Richard Church & Mark Daskin, 2012. "The stochastic interdiction median problem with disruption intensity levels," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 201(1), pages 345-365, December.
    18. Wei, Ningji & Walteros, Jose L., 2022. "Integer programming methods for solving binary interdiction games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 456-469.
    19. Starita, Stefano & Scaparra, Maria Paola, 2016. "Optimizing dynamic investment decisions for railway systems protection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 543-557.
    20. Moglen, Rachel L. & Leibowicz, Benjamin D. & Kwasinski, Alexis, 2025. "The value of coordination for restoring power and wireless communication networks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).

    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:joheur:v:31:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10732-025-09554-5. 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.