Performance Analysis in Multi-KPI Optimizations

Gökhan KOÇ; Funda VARIŞ; Ferit ÖÇALDI; Murat KURAN

doi:10.18100/ijamec.796351

Research ArticlesverifiedPeer-ReviewedOpen Access

Pages: 221-225

Performance Analysis in Multi-KPI Optimizations

Gökhan KOÇ fingerprint•

Funda VARIŞ fingerprint•

Ferit ÖÇALDI fingerprint•

Murat KURAN fingerprint

Publication DateDecember 31, 2020

Volume / IssueVol. 8, No. 4 (pp. 221-225)

DOI Identifier10.18100/ijamec.796351

subject

Abstract

Importance of resource planning at airports, ports, logistic centers and similar operation points is increasing significantly each day due to competitions, intensities and irregularities in operations. Multi-objective optimization algorithms try to reach the user defined objectives of the related operations as much as possible but the performance of these algorithms starts to differ while the number of defined Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) are increasing. In multi-KPI optimization algorithms, there are many issues and parameters to consider which affect the optimizer performances such as; relationship between KPI’s, the number of KPI’s, number of resources, tasks. In addition, due to some specific business rules in the operation, not every resource can be assigned to every task and the optimization algorithm needs to consider these rules when generating allocation plan. Within the scope of this study, an optimization algorithm which is developed by TAV Technologies is used to analysis optimizer performance changes according to the number of defined KPI’s. For the same resource and task group, the optimization algorithm configured with different KPI combinations and run repeatedly. Except for the KPI definitions, all other optimizer inputs were kept constant in all tests and the results were compared with each other. Specific business rules were ignored in this study to analysis test results clearly.

Keywords:Multi ObjectiveMulti KPIOptimizationResource AllocationResource Planning

Author Affiliations

Gökhan KOÇ — TAV BİLİŞİM HİZMETLERİ A.Ş.fingerprint0000-0001-7433-2356
Funda VARIŞ — TAV Technologiesfingerprint0000-0002-2449-889X
Ferit ÖÇALDI — TAV Technologiesfingerprint0000-0003-0776-3951
Murat KURAN — TAV Technologiesfingerprint0000-0001-6700-600X

format_list_numbered

References (19)

Cited Literature

1
Inefficiency In European Airspace (Rep.). Iata Economic Briefing., 2013
2
PingSong Dong , Dong Li, PaulDrake, Multi-Objective Optimization for a Liner Shipping Service from Different Perspectives, Transportation Research Procedia, Volume 25, 2017.
3
M. Hauskrecht and T. Singliar, “Monte-Carlo optimizations for resource allocation problems in stochastic network systems,” in Proceedings of Nineteenth International Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 2003, pp. 305– 312
4
Goulielmos, A.M. (2018) The Unresolved Issues in Maritime Economics. Modern Economy, 9, 1687-1715.
5
Bayrak, A. E., (2010), “Optimization Algorithms For Resource Allocation Problem Of Air Tasking Order Preparation”, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master of science in computer engineering, Ortadoğu Teknik Üniversitesi
6
Mansouri, S. A., Lee, H., & Aluko, O. (2015). Multi-objective decision support to enhance environmental sustainability in maritime shipping: A review and future directions. Transportation Research Part E, 78, 3–18.
7
D.P. Song, Li D. and P. Drake, "Multi-objective optimization for planning liner shipping service with uncertain port times", Transportation Research Part E, vol. 84, pp. 1-22, 2015
8
C. C. Coello, G. Lamont, and D. van Veldhuizen, Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems, 2nd ed., ser. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2007.
9
S. Razavi, B. A. Tolson, and D. H. Burn, “Review of surrogate modeling in water resources,” Water Resources Research, vol. 48, no. 7, pp. n/a– n/a, 2012.
10
W. Gong, Q. Duan, J. Li, C. Wang, Z. Di, A. Ye, C. Miao, and Y. Dai, “Multiobjective adaptive surrogate modelingbased optimization for parameter estimation of large, complex geophysical models,” Water Resources Research, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 1984–2008, 2016.
11
S. Koziel, A. Bekasiewicz, I. Couckuyt, and T. Dhaene, “Efficient multiobjective simulation-driven antenna design using co-kriging,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 62, no. 11, pp. 5900– 5905, Nov 2014.
12
A. Rosales-Prez, S. Garca, J. A. Gonzalez, C. A. C. Coello, and F. Herrera, “An evolutionary multiobjective model and instance selection for support vector machines with pareto-based ensembles,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 863–877, Dec 2017.
13
T. Akhtar and C. A. Shoemaker. Efficient multi-objective optimization through population-based parallel surrogate search. CoRR, abs/1903.02167, 2019
14
K. Amouzgar, "Multi-objective optimization using Genetic Algorithms", RELIAB ENG SYST SAFE, 2012.
15
Zheng, D.X.M., Ng, T. S. T., and Kumaraswamy, M. M., Applying genetic algorithms techniques for time-cost optimization, Proc., 18th Annual Conf. ARCOM, D. Greenwood, ed., University of Northumbria, Middleborough, U.K., September 2-4, 2002, pp. 801-810.
16
G.B. Dantzig. Linear programming under uncertainty. Management Science, 1: 197-206,1955.
17
John R. Birge and Francois Louveaux. Introduction to Stochastic Programming. Springer, 1997.
18
G. Laporte, F.V. Louveaux, and H. Mercure. Priori optimization of the probabilistic traveling salesman problem. Operations Research, 42:3:543-549, 1994.
19
B. Verweij, S. Ahmed, A.J. Kleywegt, G. Nemhauser, and A. Shapiro. The sample average approximation method applied to stochastic routing problems: a computational study. Computational Optimization and Applications, 24:289-333, 2003.

Performance Analysis in Multi-KPI Optimizations

Abstract

Author Affiliations

References (19)

How to Cite This Article