线性规划与整数线性规划的比较综述

M. L. Sam, A. Saptari, M. Salleh, E. Mohamad
{"title":"线性规划与整数线性规划的比较综述","authors":"M. L. Sam, A. Saptari, M. Salleh, E. Mohamad","doi":"10.1504/IJMOR.2018.10013176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research discusses comparison of linear programming (LP) and integer linear programming (ILP). Two techniques to solve LP, simplex method and interior-point method were introduced. For ILP, available algorithms can be classified into exact algorithms and heuristic algorithms. Three criteria were used to evaluate the characteristics: time complexity, problem size and computational time. Simplex method is effective to solve small sized problems with less number of iterations while interior-point method was recommended for large sized problems due to its excellent performance and shorter computational time than simplex method. Exact algorithms are suitable for small sized problems and attain optimal solution in reasonable computational time. Meanwhile, heuristics outperform exact algorithms in solving large sized problem where it can obtain near optimal solution in an acceptable computational time. Heuristics are not guaranteed to obtain optimal solutions, compared to exact algorithms.","PeriodicalId":306451,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Math. Oper. Res.","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between linear programming and integer linear programming: a review\",\"authors\":\"M. L. Sam, A. Saptari, M. Salleh, E. Mohamad\",\"doi\":\"10.1504/IJMOR.2018.10013176\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research discusses comparison of linear programming (LP) and integer linear programming (ILP). Two techniques to solve LP, simplex method and interior-point method were introduced. For ILP, available algorithms can be classified into exact algorithms and heuristic algorithms. Three criteria were used to evaluate the characteristics: time complexity, problem size and computational time. Simplex method is effective to solve small sized problems with less number of iterations while interior-point method was recommended for large sized problems due to its excellent performance and shorter computational time than simplex method. Exact algorithms are suitable for small sized problems and attain optimal solution in reasonable computational time. Meanwhile, heuristics outperform exact algorithms in solving large sized problem where it can obtain near optimal solution in an acceptable computational time. Heuristics are not guaranteed to obtain optimal solutions, compared to exact algorithms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":306451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Int. J. Math. Oper. Res.\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Int. J. Math. Oper. Res.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMOR.2018.10013176\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Int. J. Math. Oper. Res.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMOR.2018.10013176","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文讨论了线性规划与整数线性规划的比较。介绍了求解LP的两种方法:单纯形法和内点法。对于ILP,可用的算法可分为精确算法和启发式算法。采用时间复杂度、问题大小和计算时间三个标准来评价这些特征。单纯形法能有效地解决迭代次数较少的小规模问题,而内点法因其比单纯形法性能优异、计算时间短而被推荐用于大规模问题。精确算法适用于小问题,在合理的计算时间内获得最优解。同时,启发式算法在求解大型问题时优于精确算法,可以在可接受的计算时间内获得近似最优解。与精确算法相比,启发式算法不能保证获得最优解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison between linear programming and integer linear programming: a review
This research discusses comparison of linear programming (LP) and integer linear programming (ILP). Two techniques to solve LP, simplex method and interior-point method were introduced. For ILP, available algorithms can be classified into exact algorithms and heuristic algorithms. Three criteria were used to evaluate the characteristics: time complexity, problem size and computational time. Simplex method is effective to solve small sized problems with less number of iterations while interior-point method was recommended for large sized problems due to its excellent performance and shorter computational time than simplex method. Exact algorithms are suitable for small sized problems and attain optimal solution in reasonable computational time. Meanwhile, heuristics outperform exact algorithms in solving large sized problem where it can obtain near optimal solution in an acceptable computational time. Heuristics are not guaranteed to obtain optimal solutions, compared to exact algorithms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Availability analysis of a complex system consisting of two subsystems in parallel configuration with replacement at failure An inventory model for deteriorating items with preservation facility of ramp type demand and trade credit Performance prediction and ANFIS computing for unreliable retrial queue with delayed repair under modified vacation policy Material selection through of multi-criteria decisions methods applied to a helical gearbox Stability of the optimal distribution for the searching effort to find the Markovian targets by using fuzzy maximum discounted effort reward search: case of the cooperative search techniques
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1