IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v12y2024i22p3538-d1519448.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling and Solving the Knapsack Problem with a Multi-Objective Equilibrium Optimizer Algorithm Based on Weighted Congestion Distance

Author

Listed:
  • Ziqian Wang

    (College of Big Data and Intelligent Engineering, Southwest Forestry University, Kunming 650224, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Xin Huang

    (Research Institute of Forestry Policy and Information Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Yan Zhang

    (College of Mathematics and Physics, Southwest Forestry University, Kunming 650224, China)

  • Danju Lv

    (College of Big Data and Intelligent Engineering, Southwest Forestry University, Kunming 650224, China)

  • Wei Li

    (College of Big Data and Intelligent Engineering, Southwest Forestry University, Kunming 650224, China)

  • Zhicheng Zhu

    (College of Big Data and Intelligent Engineering, Southwest Forestry University, Kunming 650224, China)

  • Jian’e Dong

    (College of Big Data and Intelligent Engineering, Southwest Forestry University, Kunming 650224, China)

Abstract

The knapsack problem is a typical bi-objective combinatorial optimization issue, wherein maximizing the value of the packed items is achieved concurrently with minimizing the weight of the load. Due to the conflicting objectives of the knapsack problem and the typical discrete property of the items involved, swarm intelligence algorithms are commonly employed. The diversity of optimal combinations in the knapsack problem has become a focal point, which involves finding multiple packing solutions at the same value and weight. For this purpose, this paper proposes a Multi-Objective Equilibrium Optimizer Algorithm based on Weighted Congestion Distance (MOEO_WCD). The algorithm employs a non-dominated sorting method to find a set of Pareto front solutions rather than a single optimal solution, offering multiple decision-making options based on the varying needs of the decision-makers. Additionally, MOEO_WCD improves the balance pool generation mechanism and incorporates a weighted congestion incentive, emphasizing the diversity of packing combination solutions under the objectives of value and weight to explore more Pareto front solutions. Considering the discrete characteristics of the knapsack combination optimization problem, our algorithm also incorporates appropriate discrete constraint handling. This paper designs multiple sets of multi-objective knapsack combinatorial optimization problems based on the number of knapsacks, the number of items, and the weights and values of the items. This article compares five algorithms suitable for solving multi-objective problems: MODE, MO-PSO-MM, MO-Ring-PSO-SCD, NSGA-II, and DN-NSGAII. In order to evaluate the performance of the algorithm, this paper proposes a new solution set coverage index for evaluation. We also used the hypervolume indicator to evaluate the diversity of algorithms. The results show that our MOEO-WCD algorithm achieves optimal coverage of the reference composite Pareto front in the decision space of four knapsack problems. The experimental results indicate that our MOEO_WCD algorithm achieves the optimal coverage of the reference composite Pareto front in the decision space for four sets of knapsack problems. Although our MOEO_WCD algorithm covers less of the composite front in the objective space compared with the MODE algorithm for knapsack problem 1, its coverage of the integrated reference solutions in the decision space is greater than that of the MODE algorithm. The experiments demonstrate the superior performance of the MOEO_WCD algorithm on bi-objective knapsack combinatorial optimization problem instances, which provides an important solution to the search for diversity in multi-objective combinatorial optimization solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziqian Wang & Xin Huang & Yan Zhang & Danju Lv & Wei Li & Zhicheng Zhu & Jian’e Dong, 2024. "Modeling and Solving the Knapsack Problem with a Multi-Objective Equilibrium Optimizer Algorithm Based on Weighted Congestion Distance," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:22:p:3538-:d:1519448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/22/3538/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/22/3538/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deb, Kalyanmoy & Tiwari, Santosh, 2008. "Omni-optimizer: A generic evolutionary algorithm for single and multi-objective optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(3), pages 1062-1087, March.
    2. Zouache, Djaafar & Moussaoui, Abdelouahab & Ben Abdelaziz, Fouad, 2018. "A cooperative swarm intelligence algorithm for multi-objective discrete optimization with application to the knapsack problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 74-88.
    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. Vahid Baradaran & Amir Hossein Hosseinian, 2020. "A bi-objective model for redundancy allocation problem in designing server farms: mathematical formulation and solution approaches," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 11(5), pages 935-952, October.
    2. Liagkouras, Konstantinos & Metaxiotis, Konstantinos, 2021. "Improving multi-objective algorithms performance by emulating behaviors from the human social analogue in candidate solutions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1019-1036.
    3. Wang, Long & Wu, Jianghai & Wang, Tongguang & Han, Ran, 2020. "An optimization method based on random fork tree coding for the electrical networks of offshore wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(P1), pages 1340-1351.
    4. Jakubik, Johannes & Binding, Adrian & Feuerriegel, Stefan, 2021. "Directed particle swarm optimization with Gaussian-process-based function forecasting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(1), pages 157-169.
    5. K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis, 2019. "Improving the performance of evolutionary algorithms: a new approach utilizing information from the evolutionary process and its application to the fuzzy portfolio optimization problem," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 272(1), pages 119-137, January.
    6. Wang, Long & Wang, Tongguang & Wu, Jianghai & Chen, Guoping, 2017. "Multi-objective differential evolution optimization based on uniform decomposition for wind turbine blade design," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 346-361.
    7. Dan Yan & Saskia E. Werners & He Qing Huang & Fulco Ludwig, 2016. "Identifying and Assessing Robust Water Allocation Plans for Deltas Under Climate Change," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(14), pages 5421-5435, November.
    8. K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis & G. Tsihrintzis, 2022. "Incorporating environmental and social considerations into the portfolio optimization process," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(2), pages 1493-1518, September.
    9. Elias Munapo & Santosh Kumar, 2021. "Reducing the complexity of the knapsack linear integer problem by reformulation techniques," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 12(6), pages 1087-1093, December.
    10. Long Wang & Jianghai Wu & Zeling Tang & Tongguang Wang, 2019. "An Integration Optimization Method for Power Collection Systems of Offshore Wind Farms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    11. K. Liagkouras & K. Metaxiotis, 2018. "A new efficiently encoded multiobjective algorithm for the solution of the cardinality constrained portfolio optimization problem," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 267(1), pages 281-319, August.
    12. Islam, Samiul & Amin, Saman Hassanzadeh & Wardley, Leslie J., 2021. "Machine learning and optimization models for supplier selection and order allocation planning," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    13. Audet, Charles & Bigeon, Jean & Cartier, Dominique & Le Digabel, Sébastien & Salomon, Ludovic, 2021. "Performance indicators in multiobjective optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(2), pages 397-422.
    14. Ali, Musrrat. & Siarry, Patrick & Pant, Millie., 2012. "An efficient Differential Evolution based algorithm for solving multi-objective optimization problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 217(2), pages 404-416.
    15. Nour Elhouda Chalabi & Abdelouahab Attia & Khalid Abdulaziz Alnowibet & Hossam M. Zawbaa & Hatem Masri & Ali Wagdy Mohamed, 2023. "A Multi–Objective Gaining–Sharing Knowledge-Based Optimization Algorithm for Solving Engineering Problems," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-37, July.
    16. Daróczy, László & Janiga, Gábor & Thévenin, Dominique, 2014. "Systematic analysis of the heat exchanger arrangement problem using multi-objective genetic optimization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 364-373.
    17. Chou, Jui-Sheng & Truong, Dinh-Nhat, 2020. "Multiobjective optimization inspired by behavior of jellyfish for solving structural design problems," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    18. Djaafar Zouache & Fouad Ben Abdelaziz & Mira Lefkir & Nour El-Houda Chalabi, 2021. "Guided Moth–Flame optimiser for multi-objective optimization problems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 877-899, January.
    19. Hasan, Basima Hani F. & Abu Doush, Iyad & Al Maghayreh, Eslam & Alkhateeb, Faisal & Hamdan, Mohammad, 2014. "Hybridizing Harmony Search algorithm with different mutation operators for continuous problems," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 1166-1182.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:22:p:3538-:d:1519448. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.