1 Introduction

Heuristics for vehicle routing problems: Sequence or set optimization?

\SetKw

Continuecontinue \SetAlCapSkip0.5em \DontPrintSemicolon\SetKwInputKwDataInput \SetKwInputKwResultOutput \SetKwForForforendfor \SetCommentStyalgcommentfont

Heuristics for vehicle routing problems: Sequence or set optimization?


Túlio A. M. Toffolo, Thibaut Vidal, Tony Wauters


KU Leuven, Department of Computer Science, CODeS & imec - Belgium

Federal University of Ouro Preto, Department of Computing - Brazil

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Computer Science Department - Brazil


Abstract. We investigate a structural decomposition for the capacitated vehicle routing problem (CVRP) based on vehicle-to-customer “assignment” and visits “sequencing” decision variables. We show that an heuristic search focused on assignment decisions with a systematic optimal choice of sequences (using Concorde TSP solver) during each move evaluation is promising but requires a prohibitive computational effort. We therefore introduce an intermediate search space, based on the dynamic programming procedure of Balas & Simonetti, which finds a good compromise between intensification and computational efficiency. A variety of speed-up techniques are proposed for a fast exploration: neighborhood reductions, dynamic move filters, memory structures, and concatenation techniques. Finally, a tunneling strategy is designed to reshape the search space as the algorithm progresses.

The combination of these techniques within a classical local search, as well as in the unified hybrid genetic search (UHGS) leads to significant improvements of solution accuracy. New best solutions are found for surprisingly small instances with as few as 256 customers. These solutions had not been attained up to now with classic neighborhoods. Overall, this research permits to better evaluate the respective impact of sequence and assignment optimization, proposes new ways of combining the optimization of these two decision sets, and opens promising research perspectices for the CVRP and its variants.

Keywords. Decision-set decompositions, Metaheuristics, Dynamic programming, Integer programming, Large neighborhood search, Vehicle routing problem

1 Introduction

The Capacitated Vehicle Routing Problem (CVRP) is classically described as a combination of a Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) with an additional capacity constraint which lends a Bin Packing (BP) substructure to the problem (Toth and Vigo 2014). It can be seen as a Set Packing (SP) problem in which the cost of each set corresponds to the distance of the associated optimal TSP tour (Balinski and Quandt 1964). These problem representations emphasize the two decision sets at play: customer-to-vehicle Assignments, and Sequencing choices for each route (Vidal et al. 2013b), a duality that has left long-standing impressions in the literature, from the early developments of route-first cluster-second (Bodin and Berman 1979, Beasley 1983) and cluster-first route-second constructive methods (Fisher and Jaikumar 1981), all the way to the set-covering-based exact methods and matheuristics which are currently gaining popularity.

Examining the recent progress on metaheuristics for the CVRP, little has changed in recent years concerning intra-route neighborhood search: Relocate, Swap and 2-opt neighborhoods and their immediate generalizations are employed, and these neighborhoods alone are sufficient to guarantee that most solutions resulting from a local search contain TSP–optimal routes. This is generally because classical CVRP instances involve short routes with up to 15 or 20 visits. For such small problems, even simple neighborhood search methods for the TSP tend to produce optimal tours.

Based on this observation, a larger effort dedicated to TSP tour optimization, as a stand-alone neighborhood, is unlikely to result in further improvements. For this reason, it is very uncommon to observe the use of larger intra-route neighborhoods (e.g., 3-Opt or beyond) in recent state-of-the-art metaheuristics. Nevertheless, does this mean that Sequencing optimization should be abandoned in favor of more extensive search concerning Assignment choices? Certainly not. Indeed, even if local minima exhibit optimal TSP tours, inter-route moves frequently lead to TSP-suboptimal tours which are rejected due to their higher cost, but would be accepted otherwise if the tours were optimized. Such solution improvements would then not arise from separate Assignment or Sequencing optimizations, but from a careful combination of both.

Figure 1 schematically represents the solution set of the CVRP, whose decision variables are split into Sequencing decisions (-axis) and Assignment decisions (-axis). The -axis also represents the solutions in terms of their Assignment decisions solely, ignoring Sequencing choices. These partial solutions can be viewed as a projection (Geoffrion 1970) of the original solutions on the space defined by a single decision subset (Assignment). Moreover, from a solution represented in terms of Assignment decisions, it is possible to find the best associated complete solution by solving each TSP associated with the routes.

Figure 1: Two alternative search spaces for the CVRP

With this picture in mind, it is tempting to conduct a search in the space rather than . After all, the size of is exponentially smaller than that of , the solutions of are in average of better quality, and the average size of a path in is smaller, such that fewer LS iterations are expected for convergence. However, the obvious drawback is that each move evaluation in requires solving one or several small TSPs to optimality, leading to a significant computational effort. Still, note that considerable progress has been made in the past 30 years with regard to the efficient solution of TSPs, and small problems with approximately 20 customers are solvable in a few milliseconds. Based on these observations, this article takes a fresh look at heuristic searches for the CVRP to answer two essential questions about the search space :

    [nosep]
  1. Is it practical and worthwhile to search in the space rather than ?

  2. If searching in requires an excessive effort, can we define a search space which maintains most of the key properties of but can be more efficiently explored ?

As will be demonstrated in Section 4, our experiments led us to answer the first question negatively: even with non-trivial memory and speedup techniques (hashtables and move filters) the computational overhead related to the exact solution of TSPs during each move evaluation, for a complete search in , does not appear worth the gain in terms of solution quality.

By contrast, our answer to the second question is positive. Rather than requiring a complete exact solution of each TSP, the dynamic programming approach of Balas and Simonetti (2001), hereafter referred to as B&S, can be employed to perform a restricted route optimization during move evaluations. Given a range parameter and an initial tour, the B&S algorithm finds, in operations, the vertex sequence with minimum cost such that no vertex is displaced by more than positions. This allows us to define a search space such that and . Moreover, even for a fixed , we propose tunneling techniques that exploit the memory of past solutions to dynamically reshape the search space, in such a way that converges towards as the search progresses.

To evaluate experimentally the potential of the new search spaces, we conduct experiments with a simple multi-start local search (MS-LS), and with the unified hybrid genetic search (UHGS) of Vidal et al. (2012, 2014a). The use of for appears to lead to solutions of higher quality on the new instances from Uchoa et al. (2017). New best solutions were also found for surprisingly small instances with as few as 242 or 256 customers. These solutions had not been attained up to now with classic neighborhoods. Overall, this research allows to better evaluate the respective impact of Sequencing and Assignment optimization, proposing new ways to combine the optimization of these two decision sets, and leading to new state-of-the-art algorithms for the CVRP.

2 Related Literature

This section reviews some key milestones concerning the management of Sequencing and Assignment decisions in vehicle routing heuristics, as well as decision-set decompositions.

Sequencing and Assignment decisions were first optimized separately in early constructive heuristics, giving rise to different families of methods. Route-first cluster-second algorithms (Bodin and Berman 1979, Beasley 1983) first produce a giant TSP tour, before subsequently assigning consecutive visits into separate trips to produce a complete solution. In cluster-first route-second methods (Fisher and Jaikumar 1981), a clustering algorithm is employed to group customer visits into clusters, followed by TSP optimizations. Finally, petal algorithms (Foster and Ryan 1976, Renaud et al. 1996) are based on an a-priori generation of candidate routes (petals), followed by the solution of a set packing or covering problem.

In the development of local search and metaheuristic algorithms which ensued in the 1990s and thereafter, Assignment and Sequencing optimizations began to be better integrated. Classical moves such as Relocate, Swap, 2-opt* and their close variants allow to optimize both decision subsets. The associated neighborhood search methods form the basis of the vast majority of state-of-the-art algorithms. Petal algorithms have withstood the test of time, and high-quality routes are now extracted from local minima of metaheuristics instead of being enumerated in advance (see, e.g., Muter et al. 2010, Subramanian et al. 2013).

The variety of vehicle routing problem variants has also triggered studies concerning problem decompositions. Vidal et al. (2013b) established a review of the classical variants and their associated constraints, objectives, and decision sets, called attributes. The attributes were classified in relation to their impact on Sequencing, Assignment decisions, and Route evaluations in heuristics, leading to a structural problem decomposition which serves as a basis for the Unified Hybrid Genetic Search (UHGS) algorithm of Vidal et al. (2014a) and allows to produce state-of-the-art results for dozens of VRP variants. Many problem attributes come jointly with new decision subsets, e.g., when optimizing vehicle routing with packing, timing or scheduling constraints (Goel and Vidal 2014, Pollaris et al. 2015, Vidal et al. 2015b), visit choices (Vidal et al. 2014b) or service-mode choices (Vidal et al. 2015a, Vidal 2017).

Decision-set decompositions are employed throughout many of the aforementioned papers to perform a search in the space of Sequencing and Assignment choices and optimally determine the remaining decision variables during each route and move evaluation. In this paper, the decision-set decomposition does not result from supplementary problem attributes, but is instead used to define exponential-size polynomially-searchable neighborhoods and transform the search space. Exponential-size neighborhoods have a long history in the combinatorial optimization literature (Deineko and Woeginger 2000, Ahuja et al. 2002, Bompadre 2012). Most of these neighborhoods are based on shortest path or matching subproblems, as well as specific graph and distance matrix structures with which some NP-hard problems become tractable (consider, as examples, Halin graphs or Monge matrices). As a rule of thumb, larger neighborhoods and faster search procedures are generally desirable. There are, however, theoretical limitations to the size of polynomially-searchable neighborhoods. Gutin and Yeo (2003) proved that, for the TSP, no neighborhood of cardinality at least for a given constant can be searched unless NP P/poly.

The neighborhood of Balas and Simonetti (2001) is an exponential-size neighborhood for the TSP. Given an incumbent tour represented as a permutation and a value , it contains all permutations such that fulfills and for all such that . In other words, if precedes by more than positions in , then precedes . Setting allows to fix the origin location (e.g., depot). This neighborhood contains  solutions, and can be explored in using dynamic programming. This is a linear time complexity when is constant, and a polynomial complexity when . Balas and Simonetti (2001) performed extensive experiments, and demonstrated that this dynamic programming procedure can be used as a stand-alone neighborhood to improve high quality local minima of the TSP and its immediate variants. Later, Irnich (2008), Gschwind and Drexl (2016), and Hintsch and Irnich (2017) employed this neighborhood to solve arc-routing problems with possible cluster constraints, and dial-a-ride problems. One common characteristic of these studies is that they employed B&S as a stand-alone neighborhood for route improvements. Only in one conference presentation (Irnich 2013), the possibility of using the B&S neighborhood in combination with some classical CVRP moves has been highlighted, but the performance of such an approach remains largely unexplored.

We seek to go one step further. Rather than applying this tour optimization procedure as a stand-alone optimization technique or in combination with a single classical neighborhood, we investigate its systematic use in combination with every move of a classical CVRP local search. As discussed in the following, the methodological implications of such a redefinition of the search space are noteworthy.

3 Proposed Methodology

We will describe the methodology as a local search on indirect solution representations, using a decoder. This algorithm can be readily extended into a wide range of vehicle routing metaheuristics, e.g., tabu search, iterated local search, or hybrid genetic algorithm (Gendreau and Potvin 2010, Laporte et al. 2014). There is no widely accepted term, in the current heuristic literature, for referring to the elements which represent such indirect solutions. The evolutionary literature usually refers to a genotype to denote solution encodings (and phenotype for the solutions themselves), whereas the local-search based metaheuristic literature refers to incomplete or indirect solutions (which are converted into complete solutions via a decoder function). Incomplete lets us think that the representation is necessarily a subset of a complete solution, and unnecessarily restricts the application scope. To circumvent this issue, we henceforth employ the term primitive solutions. We first recall some basic definitions related to neighborhood search and indirect solution representations, then proceed with an analysis of alternative search spaces and the description of the proposed local search algorithm.

Definition 1 (Primitive solutions and search space).

We consider a combinatorial optimization problem of the form , where is the solution space, and is an objective function to minimize. Let be the set of primitive solutions, and let the decoder be an injective application that transforms any into a complete solution . A neighborhood is defined as a mapping that associates with each primitive solution a set of neighbors . The graph induced by and is referred to as the search space.

Definition 2 (TSP–optimal tour).

A tour is TSP–optimal if there exists no other permutation of its visits such that with a shorter total distance.

Definition 3 (B–optimal tour).

A tour is B–optimal if there exists no other permutation of its visits with a shorter total distance such that and for all with . The parameter is the range of the B&S neighborhood.

3.1 A Choice of Search Space

In this section, we examine the search spaces associated with the set of all solutions (), of those with TSP–optimal tours (), and of those with B–optimal tours () and discuss their relative merits.

Search Space . Classical local search methods for the CVRP do not distinguish between primitive and complete solutions. In the usual search space , solution sets and are equal and the decoder is the identity function. The neighborhood is based on the definition of one or several classes of moves. A move is a local modification that can be applied to a primitive solution to generate a neighbor . For each search space considered in this paper, we will eventually refer to several classes of moves, but to a single neighborhood only, which corresponds to the union of all primitive solutions attainable from via one single move. Classical moves for the CVRP are based on relocations and exchanges of a bounded number of vertices, or replacements of a bounded number of edges. Most common neighborhoods have a quadratic cardinality ( for all ). We refer to Vidal et al. (2013b) for a comprehensive survey on classical local searches for the CVRP.

Figure 2 represents the search space associated with Relocate moves only, for a small asymmetric CVRP instance with three customers. There are 13 possible solutions for this problem, each represented by a set of ordered customer visits. Solution ‘[1,2,3]’, for example, employs one vehicle to visit customers 1, 2 and 3, while solution ‘[1][2][3]’ employs three vehicles, one per customer. Each solution is represented by a node, positioned on the -axis according to its quality (the more to the right, the better a solution is). The set of outgoing arcs of each solution points towards its neighbors. Moreover, solutions with identical customer-route assignments are grouped within dashed areas. Note that, for this instance size, it is always possible to reach the optimum solution from any starting point in two successive moves. In a local search that explores the neighborhood in random order and applies an improving move as soon as it is found, the worst case corresponds to five moves (when the initial solution is ‘[2][1,3]’ or ‘[1][2][3]’).

Figure 2: Search space for a small asymmetric CVRP instance

Search Space . As discussed earlier in this work, CVRP solutions can also be represented in terms of their Assignment decisions, excluding the Sequencing decisions in the representation and delegating the choices of the best visit sequences to the decoder. With such a paradigm, one can define a local search in the space of primitive solutions, where each represents a partition of the customer set into subsets whose sums of demands do not exceed the vehicle capacity. The decoder is based on an exact TSP solver, responsible for generating the best visit sequence originating and finishing at the depot for each subset of customers. In this sense, the image contains exclusively solutions with TSP–optimal tours.

The neighborhood used to explore the search space can remain similar to classical CVRP neighborhoods, based on relocations or exchanges of customers between subsets, or involve other families of moves specialized for partition problems. Figure 3 represents the resulting search space with simple Relocate moves. Only TSP–optimal tours are explored and therefore the size of the search space reduces down to six primitive solutions. The other solutions and their connections are represented in light gray. Note, in our small example, that now at most three successive improving moves may be applied to attain the optimum from ‘[1][2][3]’.

Figure 3: Search space for a small asymmetric CVRP instance

Search space is smaller than , and our computational experiments (Section 4) demonstrate that a search in this space indeed leads to solutions with higher quality. However, each move evaluation in this space requires executing an algorithm with exponential worst-case time complexity, a TSP solver, in order to decode each primitive solution in the neighborhood for cost evaluation. Although research on the TSP has culminated in very efficient algorithms over the past thirty years, thousands (or millions) of small TSP instances should be solved during a local search in , and thus the total computational effort dedicated towards decoding can grow prohibitively large. Moreover, bad behavior in a single case (e.g., due to an unusual long route with many customers or bad branching decisions) can be sufficient, without any other safeguard, to stall the entire algorithm.

Search Space . To circumvent the aforementioned issues, we study an alternative search space in which the set of primitive solutions is a subset of the complete solutions (with their Assignment and Sequencing decisions), but where the decoder is nontrivial, and consists of applying B&S multiple times to each route with a fixed range ( value) until the tours become B–optimal. With these assumptions, the image contains exclusively complete solutions with B–optimal tours. As such, the application of B&S can be viewed as a post-optimization step during classical CVRP move evaluations, opening the way for additional solution improvements. A careful analysis of the resulting search space gives even more significance to this approach, due to three properties:

Property 1.

From an initial solution containing a B–optimal tour, a local search in the space  explores only B–optimal tours.

Property 2.

For a fixed range , each move evaluation and subsequent solution decoding is done in polynomial time as a function of and the number of applications of B&S.

Property 3.

The search space is such that and , with being the number of customers.

These three properties are all fundamental for the methodology that follows. Property 1 demonstrates how space contains fewer solutions than , and that the overall quality of these solutions tends to be higher (since non-B-optimal tours are filtered out). Moreover, Property 2 gives some computational time guarantees: even if the computational effort grows quickly with the range , the effort of the decoder is guaranteed to remain stable for all when is constant, eliminating the possibility of a computational effort peak for specific TSP instances. Finally, Property 3 demonstrates how balances the effort dedicated towards the optimization of the Assignment and Sequencing decision sets, and establishes as an intermediate search space generalizing and .

Figure 4 illustrates the search space for the same example as previous figures with . It is an intermediate between the spaces depicted by Figures 2 and 3, which correspond to and , respectively. Note how the solution is now a neighbor of and , as highlighted by the two dotted arcs.

Figure 4: Search space for a small asymmetric CVRP instance

Discussions and Choice. In light of these observations, we have conducted computational experiments on search space , using the dynamic programming algorithm of Balas and Simonetti (2001) to decode each solution, as well as on search space using the TSP solver Concorde (Applegate et al. 2006). Despite several speedup techniques (Section 3.2), the search in space remained inefficient throughout our current experiments, especially for instances with a large number of customers per route. We therefore decided to focus on search space , and devised several speedup techniques to enable its efficient exploration.

3.2 Efficient Local Search

To efficiently explore space , we developed a local search algorithm which exploits static neighborhood reductions, dynamic move filters, efficient memory structures and concatenation techniques. Most of these techniques seek to limit the search effort in . This resulting method, displayed in Algorithm 3.2, can be easily integrated in state-of-the-art metaheuristics for vehicle routing problems.

{algorithm}

[p] Efficient local search in the space \KwDataAn initial complete solution , an evaluation threshold and a granularity threshold

\Repeat

is a local minimum \tcpEnumerating moves - candidate lists based on vertex proximity \Foreach move involving a vertex pair ,

The move modifies up to two routes of . Let be the sum of the costs of these two routes, and let and be the new routes in .

\tcp

First, filter infeasible moves with respect to capacity constraints in :

\If

or \Continue.

\tcp

Second, consider the cost of the classical CVRP move to filter non-promising solutions in :

\If

\Continue.

\tcp

Third, decode the routes and to evaluate the move in :

\For

each route with \tcpCompute hash key in  and check memory in :

\tcp

If not in memory, repeatedly apply the dynamic programming algorithm of Balas and Simonetti (2001) until the route becomes : \If

\tcp

Filter non-improving moves:

\If

\Continue.

\tcp

At this stage, apply since it is an improving move in : Set ;   Replace the routes (,) by (,) in \Return

Neighborhood Reductions. First of all, as in the majority of recent local search based metaheuristics for the CVRP, the neighborhood of each incumbent solution is limited to moves that involve close vertices (Algorithm 1, Line 3). In particular, we use the classical intra-route and inter-route Relocate and Swap moves, for single vertices or generalized to pairs of consecutive vertices, as well as the 2-Opt and 2-Opt* moves. The resulting neighborhood contains a quadratic number of moves. As detailed in Vidal et al. (2013a), and in a similar way as Johnson and McGeoch (1997) and Toth and Vigo (2003), the search can be restricted to a subset of these moves that reconnect at least one vertex with a vertex belonging to the closest vertices of . The neighborhood size becomes , enabling a significant speedup for large-scale problem instances.

Dynamic move filters. To further restrict the search to promising moves, each move ’s feasibility is evaluated in , in terms of capacity constraints, being discarded if it leads to an infeasible solution. The total cost of the solution generated by prior to its optimization by the B&S decoder is evaluated subsequently. This cost represents an upper bound for the final cost of the move in after the application of the decoder. The move evaluation is pursued only if the solution cost has increased by a factor or less due to its application, that is, only if Condition (1) is satisfied. Otherwise, the move is discarded.

(1)

Parameter plays an important role in defining how many moves are evaluated. The higher the value of , the less pruning is induced by Equation (1). Contrastingly, when only immediately improving neighbors are evaluated. Defining a good value for is non-trivial, given that it is an instance-dependent parameter. Since a fixed value would not suit instances with different sizes and characteristics, we suggest to use an adaptive parameter. The principle consists in adjusting to ensure a target range for the fraction of filtered moves. After each 1,000 move evaluations, the fraction of filtered moves is collected and whenever it falls outside of the desired range, is updated. If this fraction is too large, then is increased by a multiplicative factor . Conversely, if is insufficient, then the parameter is decreased:

(2)

Global memory. The B&S algorithm, used as a decoder, requires a computational effort which grows linearly with the route size and exponentially with parameter . It is thus essential to restrain the use of this procedure to a strict minimum and avoid decoding twice the same route over the course of the search. To that end, we rely on a global memory to store the routes that have been decoded, avoiding recalculations (Lines 12–14). We use a hashtable for this task, since it allows queries given the hash key associated with a route.

Two important aspects should be discussed. First, since the available memory space is finite, some strategy is necessary to limit the memory size in case of an excessive space consumption. To that end, we define an upper bound on the number of routes stored in the memory and eliminate half of the entries, those used with less frequency, whenever this limit is attained.

The second aspect to be discussed concerns the effort spent querying the memory. It is well known that local searches for the CVRP evaluate millions of moves, and that constant-time move evaluations are essential for a good performance. Capacity checks (Line 5) and simple distance computations (Line 7) can be easily achieved in using incremental move evaluations or concatenation techniques (Vidal et al. 2014a). Moreover, querying the memory for a given route supposes the availability of a hash index which characterizes the associated sequence of visits, but a direct approach that sweeps through the route to compute this index already takes time. To avoid this bottleneck, we employ specific hash functions and calculation techniques based, again, on concatenations in . These concepts are discussed in the following section.

3.3 Constant-Time Evaluations

We use the concatenation strategy of Vidal et al. (2014a, 2015b) to perform efficient cost- and load-feasibility evaluations. This strategy exploits the fact that any route obtained from a classical move on an incumbent solution corresponds to a recombination of a bounded number of (customer and depot) visit sequences of . As such, the new routes can be expressed as a concatenation of sequences . We also extend this approach to enable computations of hash keys.

To efficiently evaluate the cost, load, and compute the hash keys, we perform a preliminary preprocessing on the subsequences of consecutive visits which compose the solution . Four quantities are calculated: the total demand of a sequence , its distance , and its hash keys and . For a sequence containing a single visit with demand , , , and , where is a prime number. Moreover, Equations (35) extend these quantities, by induction, for any sequence of visits expressed as the concatenation of two sequences and . In these equations, expresses the distance between visits and .

(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)

As in Vidal et al. (2014a), Equations (36) are first employed iteratively, in lexicographic order, to obtain information concerning all sequences during the preprocessing phase. Afterwards, the same equations are used for move evaluations. Since any route obtained from a classical move corresponds to the concatenation of a bounded number of sequences, it is possible to obtain the associated load, distance, and hash keys by applying these equations a limited number of times. Then, the information on subsequences is updated every time an improving move is applied, a rare occurrence in comparison to the number of moves evaluated.

The two hash functions defined in Equations (56) are employed together as a means of reducing chances of two distinct sequences having identical hashes. The function is a multiplicative hash which depends on the visit permutation (Knuth 1973). Note that, when implementing such a function, the values must be precomputed and bounded (taking the rest of the integer division by a large number) to prevent overflow during multiplication. The second function is an additive hash which only depends on the set of visited customers, and not on the visit sequence. These hash functions are easily recognized when reformulated as follows:

(7)
(8)

These functions fit well our purposes due to their inductive definition based on the concatenation operation. They are employed, along with the route distance and its number of visits, to verify a correct match in the memory in without a complete route comparison in . To minimize the risk of two routes having identical hashes, we duplicated these hash functions with different values for , leading to four hash values overall. In the first case, is set to the smallest prime number greater than the number of customers. In the second case, is set to (multiplier of Kernighan and Ritchie 1988). Despite this strategy, a tiny chance of false positives remains. However, no false positive was registered within our computational experiments considering multiple runs on 100 different instances.

3.4 Reshaping the search space – Tunneling strategy

Until now, the purpose of the global memory has been focused on saving computational effort by avoiding duplicate calls to the B&S algorithm. Yet, as shown in the following, this structure can be exploited to a larger extent to promote the discovery of good solutions.

Consider two input routes and indexed in the order of their appearance in the local search, and representing the same set of customer visits. The route is first saved in the global memory along with its associated B–optimal route of cost . Subsequently, the LS considers without finding a match in the memory, triggering a new execution of the B&S algorithm and leading to a cost . if , then the algorithm has failed to recognize that a better TSP tour has been found in prior search for the same customers.

To improve the behavior of the algorithm in such situations, we introduce a guidance mechanism called tunneling. Guidance techniques are a set of strategies which analyze and exploit the search history to direct the search towards promising or unexplored regions of the search space (Crainic and Toulouse 2008). Our method works as follows: every route issued from a non-filtered LS move and absent from the memory is decoded by the B&S algorithm; yet, rather than directly returning the output of B&S, the algorithm finds and returns the best known permutation of the visits for this customer set, found over previous B&S executions. The goal of this strategy is to intensify the search around known high-quality tours without jeopardizing the discovery of better route configurations. It can be efficiently implemented with a refinement of the hashtable-based memory structure, by grouping the routes into different buckets according to their visit set, and using the additive hash function of Equation (6) for  queries. Figure 5 summarizes this process.

Figure 5: Tunneling strategy and solution decoding

This tunneling strategy has a significant impact on the search space. Initially, as the search starts, the algorithm explores the space . Then, as the search progresses, the memory starts to be filled, and the algorithm re-introduces more and more frequently the best known routes in its solutions. In a hypothetical situation where all feasible routes have already been memorized (hypothetical due to the needed exponential memory size), the TSP–optimal routes would be systematically returned, and the algorithm behaves as if it was searching in . With this limit case in mind, the tunneling strategy contributes to reshape the space into as the search progresses. Moreover, note that this strategy remains fully relevant for a classical neighborhood search, even without B&S decoder.

Consider the same example as depicted in Section 3.1 (Figures 2, 3 and 4). Suppose that the route has been identified in the past search along with its associated B–optimal tour and that the tunneling strategy is employed. Figure 6 illustrates the resulting search space: all solutions that include ’’ in their neighborhood now point towards solution ’’ instead, which has identical customer-to-vehicle Assignments but a lower cost due to better Sequencing decisions. With only one route in memory, the resulting search space already becomes equivalent to .

Figure 6: Search space with the tunneling search strategy, after discovering the route

4 Computational experiments

We conducted extensive computational analyses to measure the benefits of a search in  and , the impact of the tunneling strategy and move evaluation filters. For these tests, we considered the simple local search (LS) described in Section 3, as well as a more advanced metaheuristic, the UHGS of Vidal et al. (2012, 2014a), which was adapted by replacing its native local search by the proposed method. This extension of the method will be referred as UHGS-BS. Except this modification of the local search, all other parameters and procedures of UHGS-BS remain the same as in the original article, and the termination criterion is set to consecutive iterations without improvement.

A single local search requires only a limited computational effort. Thus, the first analyses (Section 4.1) on the performance of the LS in and could be done for multiple values of the range parameter . It was also possible to evaluate the impact of without the interference of dynamic move filters and tunneling techniques. Since UHGS-BS performs a more extensive search with multiple local search runs, our analyses with this method (Section 4.2) are focused on a smaller set of values for the range parameter , in the presence of dynamic move filters.

All algorithms were implemented in C++ and executed on a single thread of an Intel(R) Xeon(R) E5-2680v3 CPU. A RAM limit of 8GB was imposed for each run. To solve the TSP problems when considering the space , we used the Concorde solver (Applegate et al. 2006). To conduct the experiments with the UHGS-BS, we used the code base made available at https://github.com/vidalthi/HGS-CARP, from Vidal (2017).

4.1 Preliminary experiments with a simple local search

In a first experiment, we tested the local search of Section 3 on spaces and for , to observe the growth of its computational time as a function of the parameter , and identify a range of values over which the approach remains practical. As an initial solution, we used the result of the savings algorithm of Clarke and Wright (1964). We set in order to observe the results without the interference of move filters.

We considered the 100 recent benchmark instances of Uchoa et al. (2017), as these instances remain highly challenging for metaheuristics and cover a larger variety of instance size and characteristics: demand and customer distribution, depot location, and route length. For each instance, we ran the method 20 times with different random seeds. The results are summarized in Figure 7, in the form of boxplots. The leftmost graph represents the percentage gap in terms of solution quality, relative to that of the best known solution (BKS) collected from Uchoa et al. (2017): , where is the solution value of the method and is the BKS value. The rightmost graph represents the CPU time of the method, using a logarithmic scale.

Figure 7: Solution quality and CPU time of the LS, depending on the search space

As illustrated by these experiments, the search in space visibly leads to solutions of higher average quality, albeit in a CPU time largely greater than that of a classical local search in . The solution quality of a search in the space consistently increases as grows, along with the needed CPU time. When , the algorithm behaves as a classical local search in . When is large, the method becomes more similar to a search in . A difference of solution quality can still be noticed between and , due to some instances containing up to 25 deliveries per route.

Each value of the range parameter establishes a trade-off between computational effort and solution quality. The computational time of the local search does not exceed two seconds when exploring with , but it culminates to 1000 seconds on the largest instances when exploring . Clearly, the additional CPU time required by Concorde is not compatible with the repeated application of local searches within state-of-the-art metaheuristic algorithms, such that we should concentrate our efforts on the exploration of the space with moderate values of .

Moreover, a careful analysis of these results on subsets of instances with a different average number of customers per route gives additional insights. This analysis is reported in Figure 8, considering the 20 instances with smallest average route cardinality, in the range , and the 20 instances with largest average route cardinality, in .

(a) Instances with average route cardinality in range [3.0, 4.55]:
{subfigure}1.0
(b) Instances with average route cardinality in range [16.47, 24.43]:
{subfigure}1.0

Figure 8: Results (solution quality and runtime) of local search on different search spaces for instances with different route cardinalities

As illustrated in Figure 8, the benefits of a search in or are small for instances with a small number of customer visits per route. In particular, all runs with lead to a similar solution quality and CPU time. This is due to the fact that B&S does an exact TSP optimization when is greater or equal to the route cardinality. In contrast, the benefits in terms of solution quality are larger on instances with a high number of customer visits per vehicle. We observe a significant improvement of the solutions when varies from to , from an average gap of down to . Subsequently, as increases beyond , the rate of improvement is smaller. Increasing up to the maximum route size would still be beneficial, but impracticable in terms of CPU time.

4.2 Experiments with UHGS-BS – range parameter, move filters and tunneling

As viewed in the previous section, a local search in the space can lead to solutions of better quality than a search in , at the expense of a higher computational effort. Still, even if solution improvements were observed for simple local searches, it is an open question whether the inclusion of these extended search procedures into state-of-the-art metaheuristics translates back into significant quality improvements.

This section now analyses the performance of the UHGS-BS metaheuristic, considering in combination with dynamic move filters. The move filters are designed to eliminate a large fraction of complete move evaluations, such that a larger computational effort can be spent in the evaluation of each remaining move without significantly impacting the overall CPU time of the method.

After preliminary experiments, we observed that setting and establishes a good compromise between solution quality and computational effort. This configuration, without tunneling strategy, was used as baseline for the experiments of this section. We then modified each parameter and design choice, in turn, to investigate its impact. This experimentation was restricted to a subset of 40 instances with a number of customer visits , as these instances require limited CPU time and remain challenging for state-of-the-art metaheuristics. For each instance, ten runs have been conducted with different seeds.

Impact of the range parameter. Figure 9 compares the performance, in terms of average percentage gap and CPU time, of the classical UHGS with that of its extended version searching in , for . As in previous figures, the results are presented in the form of boxplots.

Figure 9: Results (solution quality and runtime) of UHGS-BS for different cache strategies and values

As expected, the gaps obtained with the variants of UHGS-BS are much smaller than those of simple local searches, due to the better exploration capabilities of the method. Average gaps range from when exploring the classical search space , to when exploring . As highlighted by pairwise Wilcoxon tests, statistically significant differences exist between the results of , and (p-values ). A decreasing returns effect can also be observed; the difference of quality between the solutions obtained by and is larger than between by , which is turn is larger than between by , and so on. The configuration , in particular, achieves a good trade-off between quality and search effort. As demonstrated by the outliers with negative gap in the figure, this configuration has led to new best known solutions for surprisingly small instances with 256 and 294 customers, on which hundreds of test runs had been conducted in past. This is an indication that the search in has the potential to lead to structurally different solutions, which were not attained with more classical searches. The main challenge therefore is to harness this ability without sacrificing too much computational effort.

Impact of the dynamic move filter. Figure 10 investigates the impact of different target intervals (desired quantity of filtered moves – Section 3.2) for the dynamic move filters. The range parameter remains fixed to . It also indicates the results obtained when filtering all non-improving moves (), which is equivalent to using B&S only as a post-optimization procedure, after the discovery of each improving move.

Figure 10: Results (solution quality and runtime) of UHGS-BS for different values

These experiments demonstrate that move filters have a large incidence on the solution quality. These filters, are however, essential to maintain a low computational effort. In particular, filtering all non-improving moves prior to the evaluation of B&S () leads to an average gap of 0.26%, compared to 0.21% when setting as a target for the dynamic move filter and evaluating the non-filtered moves in combination with B&S. This validates an important hypothesis explored in this article: many moves that are usually discarded in regular local search methods and metaheuristics can lead to improved solutions when applied in combination with a route optimization procedure. Naturally, this capability goes along with an increased CPU time. Nonetheless, by an adequate calibration of the move filters, the total CPU time dedicated to B&S can be restricted enough to not intervene as a bottleneck. This is visible by the results of configuration , which on average used no more than twice the time of . For the remainder of these analyses, we selected this configuration, which establishes a good balance between the exploitation of the capabilities of B&S and the computational effort.

Impact of the tunneling strategy. Finally, Table 1 compares the performance of UHGS-BS without and with the tunneling strategy. The range parameter has been set to , and . The leftmost group of columns reports the instance name, number of customers average number of visits per route in the BKS for each instance. Then, the next columns present, for each approach, the average solution value over ten runs, best solution value, average CPU time, percentage of routes which have been successfully queried from the global memory without a re-evaluation, number of executions of the B&S optimization procedure, total number of iterations.

# Instance Without tunneling strategy With tunneling strategy
Time Avg. Best Cache B&S Iters Time Avg. Best Cache B&S Iters
21 X-n195-k51 3.8 44289.5 44225 60.6% 1.4E+08 34577 5.2 44272.6 44225 60.2% 1.8E+08 41713
22 X-n200-k36 5.3 58618.5 58578 97.8% 1.1E+07 43664 6.2 58625.7 58578 97.8% 1.0E+07 41788
23 X-n204-k19 5.8 19569.0 19565 91.0% 2.7E+07 31315 6.6 19568.5 19565 92.6% 2.2E+07 31118
24 X-n209-k16 15.5 30673.1 30656 77.6% 1.1E+08 35319 17.8 30676.8 30656 81.0% 9.1E+07 36174
25 X-n214-k11 34.8 10873.2 10856 70.5% 2.1E+08 48054 32.3 10872.0 10856 76.2% 1.5E+08 46133
26 X-n219-k73 12.9 117602.7 117595 3.7% 5.0E+08 30949 11.0 117603.8 117595 3.6% 5.0E+08 30773
27 X-n223-k34 6.2 40490.3 40437 95.4% 2.3E+07 38698 7.7 40489.0 40437 95.7% 2.1E+07 39268
28 X-n228-k23 14.5 25784.1 25743 87.9% 8.5E+07 48303 14.6 25779.5 25743 88.6% 6.9E+07 42435
29 X-n233-k16 10.9 19305.3 19230 87.1% 4.7E+07 31274 9.5 19309.0 19230 90.4% 3.2E+07 29652
30 X-n237-k14 16.6 27053.8 27050 75.9% 9.7E+07 26927 17.5 27047.2 27042 81.1% 8.1E+07 30294
31 X-n242-k48 8.7 82922.0 82792 94.3% 4.4E+07 49734 12.9 82919.6 82792 93.6% 6.6E+07 62591
32 X-n247-k47 14.6 37380.7 37278 49.2% 6.1E+08 63084 13.7 37393.1 37281 49.1% 5.1E+08 52872
33 X-n251-k28 12.7 38767.4 38699 90.8% 6.4E+07 48107 11.4 38793.5 38699 91.2% 4.5E+07 35265
34 X-n256-k16 8.8 18880.0 18880 85.9% 4.3E+07 22991 9.4 18875.9 18839 89.6% 3.3E+07 24930
35 X-n261-k13 43.0 26628.7 26579 71.9% 2.3E+08 46952 38.9 26620.5 26586 75.1% 1.7E+08 39770
36 X-n266-k58 14.3 75703.6 75558 98.9% 1.5E+07 69013 17.8 75737.9 75646 98.9% 1.5E+07 72435
37 X-n270-k35 6.6 35310.5 35303 96.8% 1.5E+07 34796 8.5 35318.5 35303 97.1% 1.4E+07 35654
38 X-n275-k28 11.7 21256.9 21245 89.0% 5.9E+07 36470 12.8 21255.0 21245 91.0% 4.4E+07 34488
39 X-n280-k17 69.1 33614.0 33593 66.7% 4.1E+08 53528 86.3 33600.8 33584 70.1% 4.3E+08 63405
40 X-n284-k15 82.2 20306.0 20255 70.0% 4.3E+08 73605 67.4 20283.3 20238 73.9% 3.0E+08 61772
41 X-n289-k60 18.3 95501.4 95395 69.6% 4.5E+08 75465 20.7 95475.6 95245 69.5% 4.4E+08 72940
42 X-n294-k50 9.3 47272.9 47240 96.8% 2.6E+07 47162 11.6 47289.7 47239 96.3% 3.3E+07 53125
43 X-n298-k31 7.1 34282.8 34231 94.6% 2.3E+07 27625 8.1 34280.8 34231 95.2% 2.0E+07 26203
44 X-n303-k21 22.3 21839.1 21744 86.7% 1.0E+08 43974 21.1 21833.3 21744 88.9% 7.9E+07 39415
45 X-n308-k13 73.6 25893.2 25864 68.5% 3.3E+08 48194 63.6 25911.8 25866 71.8% 2.6E+08 42804
46 X-n313-k71 15.8 94270.5 94169 57.8% 4.7E+08 54350 16.8 94289.7 94192 57.6% 4.9E+08 58766
47 X-n317-k53 29.7 78389.3 78372 97.5% 3.3E+07 60402 31.6 78405.0 78380 97.7% 3.2E+07 65092
48 X-n322-k28 10.9 29918.8 29880 93.3% 3.7E+07 36519 17.4 29894.6 29834 93.9% 4.3E+07 48316
49 X-n327-k20 31.2 27618.2 27560 81.3% 1.5E+08 44348 35.5 27591.7 27560 83.4% 1.5E+08 47634
50 X-n331-k15 71.6 31138.6 31103 65.2% 3.7E+08 47298 63.2 31128.3 31103 67.3% 3.0E+08 41354
51 X-n336-k84 34.3 139522.2 139303 39.0% 1.4E+09 86713 40.9 139572.7 139339 39.7% 1.4E+09 89964
52 X-n344-k43 11.7 42161.9 42086 97.1% 2.3E+07 42768 22.7 42136.7 42066 97.4% 3.0E+07 65989
53 X-n351-k40 26.1 26010.1 25958 94.6% 7.9E+07 72726 32.8 25991.2 25947 94.7% 8.3E+07 76997
54 X-n359-k29 65.3 51676.6 51608 84.9% 3.1E+08 84963 56.1 51684.5 51569 85.9% 2.4E+08 67011
55 X-n367-k17 92.0 22870.1 22814 72.2% 4.0E+08 60550 66.8 22894.6 22814 71.1% 2.8E+08 39572
56 X-n376-k94 61.3 147736.8 147718 99.2% 1.6E+07 64604 53.1 147738.1 147718 99.2% 1.4E+07 61378
57 X-n384-k52 26.0 66254.7 66095 97.7% 4.2E+07 77380 29.1 66184.1 66133 97.6% 3.8E+07 68679
58 X-n393-k38 22.7 38361.0 38269 92.7% 7.2E+07 47398 26.9 38305.5 38260 93.7% 6.5E+07 48965
59 X-n401-k29 79.6 66357.8 66269 83.9% 3.4E+08 86787 69.7 66347.6 66225 86.1% 2.7E+08 78713
60 X-n411-k19 110.9 19753.4 19725 72.8% 4.9E+08 65729 74.8 19748.3 19719 77.9% 2.9E+08 51034
Average values: 30.4 0.17% 0.02% 80.2% 2.1E+08 51058 29.3 0.15% 0.01% 81.5% 1.8E+08 49912
Table 1: Impact of the tunneling strategy for 40 medium-size instances

The tunneling strategy leads to an average Gap(%) of , compared to without tunneling. Although this is only a difference of , reducing the gap indeed becomes harder as the solution quality approaches known BKS and optimal solutions. This improvement in solution quality also comes with a reduction of the overall CPU time, as the tunneling stimulates a faster convergence towards local minima and allows a better management of the global memory, by storing at most one route per customer set. As a consequence, the chances of successful queries in the memory is sensibly higher (81.5% compared to 80.2% on average), thereby reducing on average the number of B&S executions as well as the total number of iterations. Based on these observations, tunneling is beneficial without any other visible counterpart. We will use this mechanism for the final tests on the complete set of benchmark instances, in the next section.

4.3 Comparison with recent state-of-the-art algorithms

Finally, this section reports detailed results of UHGS-BS, using the baseline configuration and the tunneling strategy, on the complete set of 100 instances proposed by Uchoa et al. (2017). The results of UHGS-BS are compared to that of the current state-of-the-art algorithms: the Hybrid Iterated Local Search (HILS) proposed by Subramanian et al. (2013), and the original UHGS of Vidal et al. (2012, 2014a), which were executed 50 times for each instance. To keep the total computational effort within reasonable limits, UHGS-BS was executed 10 times for each instance. The maximum number of consecutive iterations without improvements was set to to evaluate UHGS-BS in the same conditions as UHGS on this set of instances (Uchoa et al. 2017). A hard runtime limit of 24 hours was imposed for each run.

Tables 2 and 3 report the results obtained with UHGS-BS, in comparison with UHGS and HILS. The columns present the average CPU time in minutes, the average solution value and the best solution value for all approaches. The best results are highlighted in boldface in the table, with indicating an improvement over the best known solution from http://vrp.atd-lab.inf.puc-rio.br/, and the average gap to the best solution produced by the considered methods (including those generated during this research) is presented for each algorithm in each table’s final row.

# Instance ILS UHGS UHGS-BS
Time Average Best Time Average Best Time Average Best
1 X-n101-k25 0.1 27591.0 27591 1.4 27591.0 27591 2.4 27591.0 27591
2 X-n106-k14 2.0 26375.9 26362 4.0 26381.8 26378 17.6 26374.3 26362
3 X-n110-k13 0.2 14971.0 14971 1.6 14971.0 14971 3.9 14971.0 14971
4 X-n115-k10 0.2 12747.0 12747 1.8 12747.0 12747 6.4 12747.0 12747
5 X-n120-k6 1.7 13337.6 13332 2.3 13332.0 13332 38.3 13332.0 13332
6 X-n125-k30 1.4 55673.8 55539 2.7 55542.1 55539 6.1 55540.0 55539
7 X-n129-k18 1.9 28998.0 28948 2.7 28948.5 28940 8.4 28940.0 28940
8 X-n134-k13 2.1 10947.4 10916 3.3 10934.9 10916 20.2 10916.0 10916
9 X-n139-k10 1.6 13603.1 13590 2.3 13590.0 13590 8.9 13590.0 13590
10 X-n143-k7 1.6 15745.2 15726 3.1 15700.2 15700 33.1 15700.0 15700
11 X-n148-k46 0.8 43452.1 43448 3.2 43448.0 43448 5.1 43448.0 43448
12 X-n153-k22 0.5 21400.0 21340 5.5 21226.3 21220 15.2 21225.6 21225
13 X-n157-k13 0.8 16876.0 16876 3.2 16876.0 16876 28.4 16876.0 16876
14 X-n162-k11 0.5 14160.1 14138 3.3 14141.3 14138 12.2 14138.0 14138
15 X-n167-k10 0.9 20608.7 20562 3.7 20563.2 20557 36.1 20557.0 20557
16 X-n172-k51 0.6 45616.1 45607 3.8 45607.0 45607 5.7 45607.0 45607
17 X-n176-k26 1.1 48249.8 48140 7.6 47957.2 47812 16.2 47830.7 47812
18 X-n181-k23 1.6 25571.5 25569 6.3 25591.1 25569 13.9 25569.4 25569
19 X-n186-k15 1.7 24186.0 24145 5.9 24147.2 24145 20.2 24145.0 24145
20 X-n190-k8 2.1 17143.1 17085 12.1 16987.9 16980 161.9 16985.3 16980
21 X-n195-k51 0.9 44234.3 44225 6.1 44244.1 44225 9.3 44283.8 44225
22 X-n200-k36 7.5 58697.2 58626 8.0 58626.4 58578 12.0 58615.1 58578
23 X-n204-k19 1.1 19625.2 19570 5.4 19571.5 19565 15.7 19567.0 19565
24 X-n209-k16 3.8 30765.4 30667 8.6 30680.4 30656 35.7 30671.3 30656
25 X-n214-k11 2.3 11126.9 10985 10.2 10877.4 10856 52.3 10872.1 10856
26 X-n219-k73 0.9 117595.0 117595 7.7 117604.9 117595 18.2 117600.5 117595
27 X-n223-k34 8.5 40533.5 40471 8.3 40499.0 40437 18.6 40478.4 40437
28 X-n228-k23 2.4 25795.8 25743 9.8 25779.3 25742 29.0 25768.0 25743
29 X-n233-k16 3.0 19336.7 19266 6.8 19288.4 19230 34.0 19276.5 19230
30 X-n237-k14 3.5 27078.8 27042 8.9 27067.3 27042 32.2 27048.8 27042
31 X-n242-k48 17.8 82874.2 82774 12.4 82948.7 82804 18.1 82920.9 82751
32 X-n247-k47 2.1 37507.2 37289 20.4 37284.4 37274 27.7 37388.9 37274
33 X-n251-k28 10.8 38840.0 38727 11.7 38796.4 38699 20.2 38778.7 38684
34 X-n256-k16 2.0 18883.9 18880 6.5 18880.0 18880 23.0 18867.7 18839
35 X-n261-k13 6.7 26869.0 26706 12.7 26629.6 26558 48.6 26618.1 26558
36 X-n266-k58 10.0 75563.3 75478 21.4 75759.3 75517 29.9 75710.7 75478
37 X-n270-k35 9.1 35363.4 35324 11.3 35367.2 35303 18.9 35314.6 35303
38 X-n275-k28 3.6 21256.0 21245 12.0 21280.6 21245 22.7 21255.0 21245
39 X-n280-k17 9.6 33769.4 33624 19.1 33605.8 33505 136.2 33587.9 33503
40 X-n284-k15 8.6 20448.5 20295 19.9 20286.4 20227 97.7 20282.1 20228
41 X-n289-k60 16.1 95450.6 95315 21.3 95469.5 95244 41.7 95447.2 95211
42 X-n294-k50 12.4 47254.7 47190 14.7 47259.0 47171 27.0 47272.7 47161
43 X-n298-k31 6.9 34356.0 34239 10.9 34292.1 34231 20.7 34276.3 34231
44 X-n303-k21 14.2 21895.8 21812 17.3 21850.9 21748 48.4 21811.2 21744
45 X-n308-k13 9.5 26101.1 25901 15.3 25895.4 25859 112.8 25897.3 25861
46 X-n313-k71 17.5 94297.3 94192 22.4 94265.2 94093 30.6 94280.4 94045
47 X-n317-k53 8.6 78356.0 78355 22.4 78387.8 78355 50.3 78385.3 78355
48 X-n322-k28 14.7 29991.3 29877 15.2 29956.1 29870 27.7 29892.5 29834
49 X-n327-k20 19.1 27812.4 27599 18.2 27628.2 27564 68.7 27590.8 27532
50 X-n331-k15 15.7 31235.5 31105 24.4 31159.6 31103 102.1 31126.7 31103
Average gap: 0.37% 0.13% 0.14% 0.02% 0.10% 0.00%
Table 2: Results for the instances with up to 331 customers from Uchoa et al. (2017)
# Instance ILS UHGS UHGS-BS
Time Average Best Time Average Best Time Average Best
51 X-n336-k84 21.4 139461.0 139197 38.0 139534.9 139210 66.0 139460.1 139303
52 X-n344-k43 22.6 42284.0 42146 21.7 42208.8 42099 39.7 42156.1 42056
53 X-n351-k40 25.2 26150.3 26021 33.7 26014.0 25946 51.5 25981.8 25938
54 X-n359-k29 48.9 52076.5 51706 34.9 51721.7 51509 112.0 51640.7 51555
55 X-n367-k17 13.1 23003.2 22902 22.0 22838.4 22814 117.3 22876.2 22814
56 X-n376-k94 7.1 147713.0 147713 28.3 147750.2 147717 70.3 147740.5 147714
57 X-n384-k52 34.5 66372.5 66116 40.2 66270.2 66081 56.8 66170.3 65997
58 X-n393-k38 20.8 38457.4 38298 28.7 38374.9 38269 49.3 38309.3 38260
59 X-n401-k29 60.4 66715.1 66453 49.5 66365.4 66243 110.2 66359.0 66212
60 X-n411-k19 23.8 19954.9 19792 34.7 19743.8 19718 126.0 19736.7 19721
61 X-n420-k130 22.2 107838.0 107798 53.2 107924.1 107798 87.7 107913.7 107798
62 X-n429-k61 38.2 65746.6 65563 41.5 65648.5 65501 65.6 65661.6 65470
63 X-n439-k37 39.6 36441.6 36395 34.6 36451.1 36395 57.1 36410.1 36395
64 X-n449-k29 59.9 56204.9 55761 64.9 55553.1 55378 132.6 55432.7 55330
65 X-n459-k26 60.6 24462.4 24209 42.8 24272.6 24181 92.9 24226.0 24145
66 X-n469-k138 36.3 222182.0 221909 86.7 222617.1 222070 142.3 222427.5 222235
67 X-n480-k70 50.4 89871.2 89694 67.0 89760.1 89535 73.1 89744.7 89513
68 X-n491-k59 52.2 67226.7 66965 71.9 66898.0 66633 81.9 66794.1 66607
69 X-n502-k39 80.8 69346.8 69284 63.6 69328.8 69253 177.7 69277.1 69247
70 X-n513-k21 35.0 24434.0 24332 33.1 24296.6 24201 99.4 24256.2 24201
71 X-n524-k137 27.3 155005.0 154709 80.7 154979.5 154774 207.3 155038.1 154787
72 X-n536-k96 62.1 95700.7 95524 107.5 95330.6 95122 144.5 95335.4 95112
73 X-n548-k50 64.0 86874.1 86710 84.2 86998.5 86822 136.6 86881.0 86778
74 X-n561-k42 68.9 43131.3 42952 60.6 42866.4 42756 77.2 42860.0 42733
75 X-n573-k30 112.0 51173.0 51092 188.2 50915.1 50780 782.4 50876.9 50801
76 X-n586-k159 78.5 190919.0 190612 175.3 190838.0 190543 234.3 190752.4 190442
77 X-n599-k92 73.0 109384.0 109056 125.9 109064.2 108813 166.9 108993.3 108576
78 X-n613-k62 74.8 60444.2 60229 117.3 59960.0 59778 103.6 59859.7 59654
79 X-n627-k43 162.7 62905.6 62783 239.7 62524.1 62366 543.1 62442.9 62254
80 X-n641-k35 140.4 64606.1 64462 158.8 64192.0 63839 304.4 64105.6 63859
81 X-n655-k131 47.2 106782.0 106780 150.5 106899.1 106829 253.2 106855.6 106804
82 X-n670-k126 61.2 147676.0 147045 264.1 147222.7 146705 267.7 147663.9 147163
83 X-n685-k75 73.9 68988.2 68646 156.7 68654.1 68425 177.0 68596.0 68496
84 X-n701-k44 210.1 83042.2 82888 253.2 82487.4 82293 368.0 82409.2 82174
85 X-n716-k35 225.8 44171.6 44021 264.3 43641.4 43525 437.2 43599.9 43498
86 X-n733-k159 111.6 137045.0 136832 244.5 136587.6 136366 334.2 136607.4 136424
87 X-n749-k98 127.2 78275.9 77952 313.9 77864.9 77715 308.3 77862.8 77605
88 X-n766-k71 242.1 115738.0 115443 383.0 115147.9 114683 330.5 115115.9 114812
89 X-n783-k48 235.5 73722.9 73447 269.7 73009.6 72781 351.2 72892.4 72738
90 X-n801-k40 432.6 74005.7 73830 289.2 73731.0 73587 424.0 73651.6 73466
91 X-n819-k171 148.9 159425.0 159164 374.3 158899.3 158611 675.6 158849.0 158592
92 X-n837-k142 173.2 195027.0 194804 463.4 194476.5 194266 634.9 194504.0 194356
93 X-n856-k95 153.7 89277.6 89060 288.4 89238.7 89118 314.6 89220.0 89020
94 X-n876-k59 409.3 100417.0 100177 495.4 99884.1 99715 543.1 99780.3 99610
95 X-n895-k37 410.2 54958.5 54713 321.9 54439.8 54172 500.2 54407.4 54254
96 X-n916-k207 226.1 330948.0 330639 560.8 330198.3 329836 1082.5 330153.2 329866
97 X-n936-k151 202.5 134530.0 133592 531.5 133512.9 133140 1022.2 133729.3 133376
98 X-n957-k87 311.2 85936.6 85697 432.9 85822.6 85672 307.9 85681.5 85555
99 X-n979-k58 687.2 120253.0 119994 554.0 119502.1 119194 928.4 119527.7 119188
100 X-n1001-k43 792.8 73985.4 73776 549.0 72956.0 72742 952.8 72903.3 72629
Average gap: 0.74% 0.42% 0.30% 0.06% 0.24% 0.03%
Table 3: Results for the instances with more than 331 customers from Uchoa et al. (2017)

These tables highlight how the local search applied on resulted in several improvements over the best solutions obtained by the state-of-the-art methods considered, with an average gap of 0.10% and 0.24% on the medium and large instances, respectively, in comparison with 0.14% and 0.30% for a classical search in . This improvement in solution quality comes at the price of an overall twofold increase of CPU time.

Another notable observation of these experiments is that the search in finds solutions which are structurally different. Indeed, we obtained some new best known solutions for unexpectedly small instances, with 256, 294, 322 and 327 customers (marked with a ). This is not a coincidence, given that the BKS listed at http://vrp.atd-lab.inf.puc-rio.br/ already originate from various previous articles and methods, over a large cumulated amount of test runs and parameter settings. For the particular case of the instance X-n256-k16, one interesting characteristic was observed: only 16 vehicles are used, with a total capacity usage of 99.6%.

5 Conclusions and future work

In this article, we investigated decision-set decompositions for the classic CVRP. Our experiments show that decomposing the problem into Assignment and Sequencing decisions, and conducting local search in the Assignment space () generates consistently better results than heuristically searching in the complete search space . When doing so, each solution is systematically decoded by finding optimal routes (Sequencing decisions) with the Concorde TSP solver. However, the extra CPU dedicated to solution decoding is prohibitively high to employ this technique within state-of-the-art metaheuristics. To circumvent this issue, the B&S neighborhood was employed to define an intermediate search space () which can be more efficiently searched while retaining a high solution quality.

Different techniques were proposed and evaluated for efficiently searching in space : neighborhood reduction, dynamic move filters, concatenation techniques and efficient memory structures. Moreover, tunneling techniques were employed to reshape into a search space more similar to as the search progresses. The combination of these techniques within the UHGS solver resulted in an significant improvement of solution accuracy. Multiple instances from the literature had their best known solution improved, and new state-of-the-art results were obtained for the CVRP.

This improvement of search space, however, still results in some extra computational effort. Therefore, many research perspectives are open about how to fully exploit a larger search space such as without any time compromise. One possibility could be to employ the search in only in exceptional circumstances, for a selected subset of promising solutions (e.g., each new best incumbent solutions during the search). Other open research possibilities relate to the search space . Indeed, even with efficient memory structures and neighborhood reduction techniques, using Concorde for each solution evaluation remains impracticable. This effort could be mitigated if good and fast lower bounds were proposed for the cost of the routes, therefore permitting to filter a large proportion of moves as in Vidal (2017). Concorde is also not optimized to handle millions of small cardinality routes issued from a local search, such that a dedicated TSP solution procedure exploiting information from the current incumbent solution represents another promising research line. Finally, the proposed approach can be naturally evaluated for other variants of the CVRP, in the presence of different types of attributes that have an impact on the Assignment and Sequencing decision classes. These are all promising perspectives for future research at the crossroads of dynamic programming, integer programming, and metaheuristics.

Acknowledgements

This research has been funded by the Belgian Science Policy Office (BELSPO) in the Interuniversity Attraction Pole COMEX (http://comex.ulb.ac.be), the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPQ – grant number 308498/2015-1) and FAPERJ in Brazil (grant number E-26/203.310/2016). The computational resources and services used in this work were provided by the VSC (Flemish Supercomputer Center), funded by the Hercules Foundation and the Flemish Government – department EWI. This support is gratefully acknowledged. In addition, we would like to thank Luke Connolly for providing editorial consultation.

References

Comments 0
Request Comment
You are adding the first comment!
How to quickly get a good reply:
  • Give credit where it’s due by listing out the positive aspects of a paper before getting into which changes should be made.
  • Be specific in your critique, and provide supporting evidence with appropriate references to substantiate general statements.
  • Your comment should inspire ideas to flow and help the author improves the paper.

The better we are at sharing our knowledge with each other, the faster we move forward.
""
The feedback must be of minimum 40 characters and the title a minimum of 5 characters
   
Add comment
Cancel
Loading ...
130098
This is a comment super asjknd jkasnjk adsnkj
Upvote
Downvote
""
The feedback must be of minumum 40 characters
The feedback must be of minumum 40 characters
Submit
Cancel

You are asking your first question!
How to quickly get a good answer:
  • Keep your question short and to the point
  • Check for grammar or spelling errors.
  • Phrase it like a question
Test
Test description