Recherche locale et optimisation combinatoire : de l'analyse structurelle d'un problème à la conception d'algorithmes efficaces
44
0
0
Texte intégral
(2) % & '()). . .
(3) . !"$ . *
(4) +
(5) + , .
(6) + . !!!.
(7) .
(8) . . " "" . 5 " # . ! . 34 .
(9) . 1 2. /0
(10). '.
(11) . . $% # %& " ' ! . . *! . . . . #"#. +
(12) !,- ! .#- . , /. '! +(# , -
(13) & /. . . '! . #. #. . , . $%# . # . (') & . . # . . . $%# . 4
(14) . /0
(15). 6.
(16) !0# "#+/. . # #1. '! 1. . . , . . . .
(17) ! . . . ! . . . . ,! . . . . 8 !
(18) . /0
(19). 7.
(20) 3 ""# , 1. 3 1. . . 5 # &. 4 !3
(21) &, . 8
(22) . 3
(23) ! 1. . 2 . ,, # " ' . 4. /0
(24). 9.
(25) # " . 34 , ) & +" /. = 8 .
(26) ## . . 5 . :. .# . #. . 6,- ; %
(27) %
(28)
(29) 4 -
(30) . - 7 8- 892:. . . . ;6,- 892:< .
(31) . /0
(32).
(33) 8 ! = : ,! "# . 8
(34) . /0
(35). '
(36) . <.
(37) . . . 1 ,!1 # 1. & .
(38) & 3 #. 4 ?@ . /0
(39). >.
(40) . . . . .
(41) % + 4. /. 4 . ! & # * > . $# # # # 0! . $# 0! # ! # #. #, " # 0! # ! "" # #. 0! ' #. . . . A
(42) .
(43) . &.
(44) . . ,! +'8/ A :. C +$@/ . ,! +'8/?. B +/ . 8
(45) . A
(46) . $@'5. '5. )(.
(47) . . # > C- 8B- :B. #, " & ! ;8D99<. . ! > :B- CB- 8BB- :BB- CBB. . . . . . . # 1 # 1 " , ! 1. )). (# #. !'# +0#/ #'# + #/ !A #'# + %#/. #, . # > :B. ! > :B- CB- 8BB- :BB.
(48) # ;6 - :BB:<. 3 # ### # . . . . ;
(49) # ; - 8992<. B . A
(50) .
(51) . . . . . . 6& & 1 ""##&
(52) 1
(53) ! & 1. . & 5. 1. & 3 4. . . & # . K !. !
(54)
(55) ;.H - 899G D * - :BBJ<. ;* - :BBG<. E , # ;3 - 89F2<. $%# !# ! ;*' # - 8999<. , & . . A
(56) . )'.
(57) " # " # " # " #.
(58) # " # . , ""# # # 3 & #. . . . DA
(59)
(60) E. . )6.
(61) $@'5 + /. . #. 8BBB
(62) !,. . , ! .# (# , . . K &. *,,. . . 'L - -
(63) - .
(64) . !
(65)
(66) - " # , , +## /.
(67) !, +./ . 6 . ; E - :BB8 D - 899J<. #. . . .
(68) # #. '5 + /. . : # . C .
(69)
(70) . )7.
(71) .'5 NN ('5. ('5 NN ($@'5. .'5 NN .$@'5. '5 " . (. B8 *;B8HH F D85 . . . . . O # 6 O # *,,. =. G. G. =. =. F!. '5 " . (- # $@'5. G. =. =. G. G. B8!. O ( ! 6 O O # K & O # *,,. +, # ,/. # *,,. +, " " /. # K &. +, . , " /. . +, # !3 /. # 6. +, # !3 /. ( ! 6. #. *.
(72)
(73) . )9.
(74) " # " # " # " #.
(75) # " # . , ""# # # 3 & #. . . . DA
(76)
(77) E. . ):.
(78) . . . . . 3 ,! ! " )<. 8 A 01882 ## !', 3 # 3 " 3 # ## " & ,!. 8
(79) " ! " ,!. 8 " Q 3 " . +P/ "" ,! ! " . 8
(80) .
(81) . . . . ""# 1. " 1. ,1. A 0 +/. " 1. @ . 8
(82) . )>.
(83) 8 I0. 8 8A 0 . 8
(84) . . . . . # . ! " !" ", . * " ,. ,. . . )&.
(85) 'L - -
(86) - ",- . 7 - & " 5 3 .# , 5 # - :B88-
(87) .- . ,- , :2FO:C:- :B88. 8 8A 0; . 8
(88) . '(.
(89) . . 3 K1. " 1. 8 8A 0C 4J* . 8
(90) . ').
(91) . . , ##, # . ,! . . 8 I0 * . . . .# +8:/. +88/. #. # . C . 8
(92) . . 2B R#. *. . ''.
(93) . E3 8 2BS. . . . 2 # !& 3 4. 8- :. ,. ! #. 5 # 3 3 4 # 3
(94) !,. 3 ,- " ". !
(95) # . . # 3 R #. . . # 3 R 0!. 34. . , +/. * L;
(96) B . 8
(97) . '6.
(98) #- %# , 9BS. . # 3 3 4 )#4 &. . ! #.
(99) !, # ( ! &. 2 # !& 3 4 +0#/. ( ! + #- %#/. . ,. . 34. . !
(100) # . 0# &. # 3 # ,. . . , +/. * L
(101) B . 8
(102) . '7.
(103) " # " # # " #.
(104) # " # . , ""# # # 3 & #. . . . DA
(105)
(106) E. . '9.
(107) ! " " & 2. , *. . . =. C8 . # # % & " # #. 8 A ; E- :BB8 < # # ## " ,! 3 K " . , " . . 8 1)2. ':.
(108) . . . . . 8 4 +% " &/ * +3 ""# #/. $# , " # . !. 5'
(109) !, +5
(110) /. . # #. 8 O % ! " + / . . 'L - -
(111) - ",- . 7 - . &'! # .# # 5 3 .# ,- $
(112) :B88-
(113) .- . ,- , 898O:B:- :B88. . '"" % A % . . . 8 !
(114) B
(115) . . 8B. '<.
(116) +
(117) /. + . /. . 8B. '>.
(118) ! " +: 8BG/. , #. . 2B R# R .. *. .# +8:/. . . . [Ruiz and Stützle, 2007]. (& +(/. #3 +
(119) /. . +88/. . #. . ' 6 #% , 4 . . 7 3 # . . ##, # . * 2 $%#,' . . . ,! . . . . .. C . 8B. '&.
(120) Deviation to the best-known under 1.22%: other instances. Best-known is found: 6 instances. Better performance with large MNS value (not too high). . . . 2 & !& 3 4. & 2. # &. Comparable performance with NC and IG. NILS vs. Literature:. . . . NILS Performance:. * L;
(121) B . 8B. 6(.
(122) New Best-known found: 1 instance. Best-known always found: 11 instances. Better performance with large MNS value (not too high). . . . 2 & !& 3 4. ( ! # & !&
(123). # &. Higher performance: best-known is always found. NILS vs. ILS:. . . . NILS Performance:. * L
(124) B . 8B. 6).
(125) ! . , , . . . . 6& & ## " #1. K. 5 - 8B ! . . . . . . 8B. 6'.
(126) ! " " & 2. , *. . . =. C 8 8A 0.
(127) , . ( 3 # ! &. . . # #. 44 ; !,- 899T < ! & " # . =. 5
(128) # # " . , " . . 8 1'2. 66.
(129) , " " ,! ,. % . 5" !& , "3 . 4 4 ,!. 44 . . . 44 3 444 . ! !3 R ! " ## ""$ "!. $ ! &
(130) !3 ,!. + #/. $% * . 67.
(131) # " . '"" .
(132) , . ! " . ! " . U
(133) "# E +U
(134) E/. ' E ;
(135) ! !3 C C. &" ( ! ( $ )
(136)
(137) ) *+,- ( . ) ./.%..0) 1! 2-,-. . . !
(138) /
(139) . . 69.
(140) 8 ,! . $ ! &. # " .
(141) , . 6:. V3 " # , 3 ! " 1 = . +U
(142) E/. . M 44!5
(143)
(144)
(145) 4 . . M 5.
(146) . . . . . . #, ,! 3 N / U ,
(147) + ! &/ U ,. $# , " " 3 . . %%. '"" % A % . . ! . 5'
(148) !, +5
(149) /. . # #. 'L - -
(150) - ",- . 7 - * 7$(. (, .# 34- ($
(151)
(152) :B88-
(153) - , 89G9O89FJ- :B88. . . M 44!5
(154)
(155)
(156) 4 . . M 5. 6<.
(157) +
(158) /. + 7$(. /. . M 5. 6>.
(159) ! " +: 8BG/. , #. . 2B R# R R R . +88/. . #3 +
(160) /. . . #. . . 6 #% , 4 . . '. 7 3 # . " # & +:/. !& +2/ . . +C/ . '"" +2/ . * 2 $%#,' . ,! . *. . . . . . . . .. C . M 5. 6&.
(161) Deviation to the best-known under 1.56%: other instances. . Random selection gives very bad performance against VEGAS. On average, VEGAS performance is lower than NC. . . VEGAS vs. Local Search Methods:. Best-known is found: 6 instances. Better performance with that t encourages evolvability, with large value and with value from landscape analysis v. . . VEGAS Performance:. * L;
(162) B . M 5. 7(.
(163) @ ! . ""# 3 #. . . U
(164) E 3 ""##&. . 5 - M 5 ! # # 4
(165). ", ! &
(166) . . ! . . . 7$(. . . M 5. 7).
(167) . . . . . B 4. . . 7$(. A 8 8A 0 # ! # # # 3 #
(168) . . & # !
(169) # #. 8 ! #.
(170) # " #. 8 .
(171) . B. DA
(172)
(173) E. 5 . . 7'.
(174) . . . . $ " . W. . . # &1. 3
(175) # 341. . 3
(176) 44 1.
(177) # " ,! . .
(178) # & ! 1. 6 3 ! 8B M 5 ! 1. 0. . 76.
(179) @ E. 77.
(180)
Documents relatifs
