ÇOK AMAÇLI TESİS YERLEŞİM PROBLEMİ İÇİN YENİ BİR MELEZ SEZGİSEL ALGORİTMA

Öz

Bu makalede, Çok Amaçlı Tesis Yerleşim Probleminin (ÇATYP) çözümü için, tabu listesi ile desteklenmiş,Tavlama Benzetimi’ne (TB) dayalı yeni bir melez sezgisel algoritma önerilmektedir. TB’ne tabu listesinineklenmesiyle oluşturulan yeni melez sezgisel algoritmanın en önemli avantajı, TB’nin olasılıklı yapısı korunurken,aynı zamanda kısa dönemli hafıza (tabu listesi) ile daha önce üretilen komşu çözümlerin tekrar üretilmesininengellenmesidir. Yeni melez sezgisel algoritmanın amacı, ÇATYP’nin etkin çözümler kümesini (pareto optimalset) oluşturan çözümleri kısa zaman içinde bulmaktır. Yeni melez sezgisel algoritmanın etkinliği 8 bölüm ve 4amaçtan oluşan bir örnek problem üzerinde gösterilmiştir. Algoritma ile önceden belirlenmiş ağırlıklar için en iyiyerleşim planı ile aynı zamanda problemin etkin çözümlerinin oluşturduğu pareto çözümler kümesi bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tesis yerleşim problemi, çok amaçlı eniyileme, pareto optimalite, melez sezgisel algoritma.

Kaynakça

1. Jajodia, S., Minis, I., Harhalakis, G. and Proth,
2. J.M., “CLASS: computerized layout solutions
3. using simulated annealing”, International
4. Journal of Production Research, Cilt 30, No 1,
5. –108, 1992.
6. Muther, R., Systematic Layout Planning (SLP),
7. nd Edition, Cahners Books, Boston, 1974.
8. Armour, G.C. and Buffa, E.S., “A heuristic

9. algorithm and simulation approach to relative
10. allocation of facilities”, Management Science,
11. Cilt 9, 294–309, 1963.
12. Houshyar, A., “Computer aided facilities layout:
13. an interactive multi-goal approach”, Computers
14. and Industrial Engineering, Cilt 20, No 2, 177-
15. , 1991.
16. Chen, C.-W. and Sha, D.Y., “Heuristic approach
17. for solving the multi-objective facility layout
18. problem”, International Journal of Production
19. Research, Cilt 43, No 21, 4493-4507, 2005.
20. Malakooti, B., “Multiple objective facility layout:
21. a heuristic to generate efficient alternatives”,
22. International Journal of Production Research,
23. Cilt 27, No 7, 1225–1238, 1989.
24. Sha, D.Y. and Chen, C.-W., “A new approach to
25. the multiple objective facility layout problem”,
26. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Cilt 12, No
27. , 59-66, 2001.
28. Rosenblatt, M.J., “The facilities layout problem:
29. a multi-goal approach”, International Journal
30. of Production Research, Cilt 17, No 4, 323-332,
31. -
32. Dutta, K.N. and Sahu, S., “A multigoal heuristic
33. for facilities design problems: MUGHAL”,
34. International Journal of Production Research,
35. Cilt 20, No 2, 147–154, 1982.
36. Fortenberry, J.C. and Cox, J.F., “Multiple criteria
37. approach to the facilities layout problem”,
38. International Journal of Production Research,
39. Cilt 23, No 4, 773–782, 1985.
40. Urban, T.L., “A multiple criteria model for the
41. facilities layout problem”, International Journal
42. of Production Research, Cilt 25, No 12, 1805–
43. , 1987.
44. Harmonosky, C.M. and Tothero, G.K., “A multifactor
45. plant layout methodology”, International
46. Journal of Production Research, Cilt 30, No 8,
47. –1789, 1992.
48. Suresh, G. and Sahu, S., “Multiobjective facility
49. layout using simulated annealing”, International
50. Journal of Production Economics, Cilt 32, No
51. , 239-254, 1993.
52. Chen, C.-W. and Sha, D.Y., “A design approach
53. to the multi-objective facility layout problem”,
54. International Journal of Production Research,
55. Cilt 37, No 5, 1175–1196, 1999.
56. Hahn, P.M. and Krarup, J., “A hospital facility
57. layout problem finally solved”, Cilt 12, No 5-6,
58. -496, 2001.
59. Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, Jr.C.D. and Vecchi, M.P.,
60. “Optimization by Simulated Annealing”,
61. Science, Cilt 220, No 4598, 671-680, 1983.
62. Blum, C. and roli, A., “Metaheuristics in
63. combinatorial optimization: Overview and
64. conceptual comparison”, ACM Computing
65. Surveys, Cilt 35, No 3, 268-308, 2003.
66. Elmohamed, S., Fox, G. and Coddington, P., “A
67. Comparison of Annealing Techniques for
68. Academic Course Scheduling”, In proceedings
69. of the 2nd International Conference on the
70. Practice and Theory of Automated
71. Timetabling, Syracuse, NY, USA, April 4, 146-
72. , 1998.
73. Zhang, L. and Wang L., “Optimal parameters
74. selection for simulated annealing with limited
75. computational effort”, IEEE International
76. Conference on Neural Networks and Signal
77. Processing, Nanjing, China, December 14-17,
78. -415, 2003.
79. Glover, F., “Heuristics for Integer Programming
80. Using Surrogate Constraints”, Decision Science,
81. Cilt 8, No 1, 156-166, 1977.
82. Zolfaghari, S. and Liang, M., “Jointly solving the
83. group scheduling and machining speed selection
84. problems: A hybrid tabu simulated and simulated
85. annealing approach”, International Journal of
86. Production Research, Cilt 37, No 10, 2377–
87. , 1999.
88. Swarnkar, R. and Tiwari, M.K., “Modeling
89. machine loading problem of FMSs and its
90. solution methodology using a hybrid tabu search
91. and simulated annealing-based heuristic
92. approach”, Robotics and Computer-Integrated
93. Manufacturing, Cilt 20, No 3, 199–209, 2004.
94. Zhang, D. and Deng, A., “An effective hybrid
95. algorithm for the problem of packing circles into
96. a larger containing circle”, Computers and
97. Operations Research, Cilt 32, 1941–1951, 2005.
98. Şahin, R. and Türkbey, O., “A new hybrid tabusimulated
99. annealing heuristic for the dynamic
100. facility layout problem”, International Journal
101. of Production Research, Cilt 47, No 24, 6855–
102. , 2009.
103. Wattanapongsakorn, N. and Levitan, S.P.,
104. “Reliability optimization models for embedded
105. systems with multiple applications”, IEEE
106. Transactions on Reliability, Cilt 53, No 3, 406–
107. , 2004.
108. Deb, K., “Multi-Objective Optimization using
109. evolutionary Algorithms”, 1st Edition, Wiley,
110. New York, 2001.