SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 60
Download to read offline
ADVANCED
OPERATIONS
RESEARCH
By: -
Hakeem–Ur–Rehman
IQTM–PU 1
RA O
INTEGER PROGRAMMING (IP)
INTEGER PROGRAMMING:
AN INTRODUCTION
2
 An integer programming model is one where one or more of the
decision variables has to take on an integer value in the final
solution
 Solving an integer programming problem is much more difficult
than solving an LP problem
 Even the fastest computers can take an excessively long time to
solve big integer programming problems
 If requiring integer values is the only way in which a problem
deviates from a linear programming formulation, then it is an
integer programming (IP) problem. (The more complete name is
integer linear programming, but the adjective linear normally is
dropped except when this problem is contrasted with the more
esoteric integer nonlinear programming problem
 So, The mathematical model for integer programming is the linear
programming model with the one additional restriction that the
variables must have integer values.
TYPES OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING
PROBLEMS
 PURE-INTEGER PROBLEMS
– require that all decision variables have integer solutions.
 MIXED-INTEGER PROBLEMS
– Require some, but not all, of the decision variables to
have integer values in the final solution, whereas others
need not have integer values.
 0–1 INTEGER PROBLEMS
– Require integer variables to have value of 0 or 1, such
as situations in which decision variables are of the yes-
no type.
INTEGER PROGRAMMING:
FORMULATION
4
 Pure ILP Problem:
A jewelery shop in the city specializes in ornaments and the manger has
planned to limit the use of diamonds to the artistic configuration of diamond
rings, diamond earnings and diamond necklaces. The three items require the
following specifications:
ORNAMENT DIAMOND
½ Carat ¼ Carat
Ring 4 6
Earring (Pair) 3 5
Necklace 10 9
Availability 150 160
The jeweler does no want to configure the diamond into more than 50 items.
The per unit profit for the rings is Rs. 1500, for earnings is Rs. 2400 and for
necklace is Rs. 3600. Formulate the problem as an ILP model for maximizing
the profit.
INTEGER PROGRAMMING:
FORMULATION
5
 Decision Variables: Let X1 = Number of diamond rings, X2
= Number of pair of earrings, X1 = Number of necklaces
 Objective Function: Max. Z = 1500X1 + 2400X2 + 3600X3
Subject to:
4X1 + 3X2 + 10X3 ≤ 150 (1/2 Carat Diamond)
6X1 + 5X2 + 9X3 ≤ 160 (1/4 Carat Diamond)
X1 + X2 + X3 ≤ 50 (Total Number of items)
With X1, X2, X3 ≥ 0; X1, X2, X3 are integers
INTEGER PROGRAMMING:
FORMULATION
 Pure ILP Problem:
Northeastern Airlines is considering the purchase of new long-, medium-, and short-
range jet passenger airplanes. The purchase price would be $67 million for each long-
range plane, $50 million for each medium-range plane, and $35 million for each short-
range plane. The board of directors has authorized a maximum commitment of $1.5
billion for these purchases. Regardless of which airplanes are purchased, air travel of
all distances is expected to be sufficiently large that these planes would be utilized at
essentially maximum capacity. It is estimated that the net annual profit (after capital
recovery costs are subtracted) would be $4.2 million per long-range plane, $3 million
per medium-range plane, and $2.3 million per short-range plane.
It is predicted that enough trained pilots will be available to the company to crew 30
new airplanes. If only short-range planes were purchased, the maintenance facilities
would be able to handle 40 new planes. However, each medium-range plane is
equivalent to 4/3 short-range planes, and each long-range plane is equivalent to 5/3
short-range planes in terms of their use of the maintenance facilities.
The information given here was obtained by a preliminary analysis of the problem. A
more detailed analysis will be conducted subsequently. However, using the preceding
data as a first approximation, management wishes to know how many planes of each
type should be purchased to maximize profit. Formulate an IP model for this problem.
INTEGER PROGRAMMING:
FORMULATION
7
INTEGER PROGRAMMING:
FORMULATION
8
 Mixed ILP Problem:
A textile company can use any or all of three different processes for weaving
in standard white polyester fabric. Each of these production processes has a
weaving machine setup cost and per square-meter processing cost. These
costs and the capacities of each of the three production processes are shown
below:
Process
Number
Weaving machine Set
–Up cost (Rs.)
Processing Cost
(Rs.)
Maximum daily
capacity (Sq.
meter)
1 150 15 2000
2 240 10 3000
3 300 8 3500
The daily demand forecasts for its white polyester fabric is 4000 Sq. meter.
The company’s production manager wants to determine the optimal
combination of the production processes and their actual daily production
levels such that the total production cost is minimized.
INTEGER PROGRAMMING:
FORMULATION
9
 Decision Variables: Let Xj be the production level for
process j (j = 1, 2, 3) also let
 Yj = 1 if process j is used, and
 Yj = 0 if process j is not used
 Objective Function:
 Minimize Z = (15X1 + 10X2 + 8X3) + (150Y1 + 240Y2 + 300Y3 )
Subject to:
X1 + X2 + X3 = 4000 (Daily Diamond)
X1 – 2000Y1 ≤ 0 (Daily Capacity of Process-1)
X2 – 3000Y2 ≤ 0 (Daily Capacity of Process-2)
X3 – 3500Y3 ≤ 0 (Daily Capacity of Process-3)
With X1, X2, X3 ≥ 0; Yj = 0 or 1, j= 1, 2, 3
INTEGER PROGRAMMING:
FORMULATION
10
 Zero–One ILP Problem:
A real estate development firm, Peterson and Johnson, is considering five
possible development projects. The following table shows the estimated long-
run profit (net present value) that each project would generate, as well as
the amount of investment required to undertake the project, in units of
millions of dollars.
The owners of the firm, Dave Peterson and Ron Johnson, have raised $20 million of
investment capital for these projects. Dave and Ron now want to select the
combination of projects that will maximize their total estimated long-run profit (net
present value) without investing more that $20 million. Formulate a Binary Integer
Programming (0–1) model for this problem.
INTEGER PROGRAMMING:
FORMULATION
11
METHODS FOR SOLVING ILP
PROBLEMS
12
1. Rounding–Off A non–integer solution
2. Cutting–Plane Method
 (developed by: Ralph E. Gomory)
3. Branch–and–Bound Method
 (Developed By: A.H. Land and A. G. Doing)
4. The Additive algorithm for Zero–One integer
programming problems
 (Developed By: E. Balas)
HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY
EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING
The Company produces two products popular with home renovators, old-
fashioned chandeliers and ceiling fans Both the chandeliers and fans
require a two-step production process involving wiring and assembly It
takes about 2 hours to wire each chandelier and 3 hours to wire a ceiling
fan Final assembly of the chandeliers and fans requires 6 and 5 hours
respectively The production capability is such that only 12 hours of wiring
time and 30 hours of assembly time are available Each chandelier produced
nets the firm $7 and each fan $6 Harrison’s production mix decision can be
formulated using LP as follows:
Maximize profit = $7X1 + $6X2
subject to 2X1 + 3X2 ≤ 12 (wiring hours)
6X1 + 5X2 ≤ 30 (assembly hours)
X1, X2 ≥ 0 (nonnegative)
where
X1 = number of chandeliers produced
X2 = number of ceiling fans produced
HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY
EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING
• The Harrison
Electric
Problem
6 –
5 –
4 –
3 –
2 –
1 –
0 –| | | | | | |
1 2 3 4 5 6 X1
X2
+
++
++++
+
6X1 + 5X2 ≤ 30
2X1 + 3X2 ≤ 12
+ = Possible Integer Solution
Optimal LP Solution
(X1 =3.75, X2 = 1.5,
Profit = $35.25)
HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY
EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING
 The production planner Wes recognizes this is an
integer problem
 His first attempt at solving it is to round the values to
X1 = 4 and X2 = 2
 However, this is not feasible
 Rounding X2 down to 1 gives a feasible solution, but
it may not be optimal
 This could be solved using the enumeration method
 Enumeration is generally not possible for large
problems
HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY
EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING
• INTEGER
SOLUTIONS
CHANDELIERS (X1) CEILING FANS (X2) PROFIT ($7X1 + $6X2)
0 0 $0
1 0 7
2 0 14
3 0 21
4 0 28
5 0 35
0 1 6
1 1 13
2 1 20
3 1 27
4 1 34
0 2 12
1 2 19
2 2 26
3 2 33
0 3 18
1 3 25
0 4 24
Optimal solution to
integer programming
problem
Solution if
rounding is used
HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY
EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING
 The rounding solution of X1 = 4, X2 = 1 gives a
profit of $34
 The optimal solution of X1 = 5, X2 = 0 gives a
profit of $35
 The optimal integer solution is less than the
optimal LP solution
 An integer solution can never be better than the
LP solution and is usually a lesser solution
METHODS FOR SOLVING ILP
PROBLEMS
18
1. Rounding–Off A non–integer solution
2. Cutting–Plane Method
 (developed by: Ralph E. Gomory)
3. Branch–and–Bound Method
 (Developed By: A.H. Land and A. G. Doing)
4. The Additive algorithm for Zero–One integer
programming problems
 (Developed By: E. Balas)
THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM
19
An Algorithm for solving Pure integer and mixed integer programming
problems has been developed by Ralph E. Gomory
1. Relax the integer requirements.
2. Solve the resulting LP problem using Simplex Method.
3. If all the basic variables have integer values, Optimality of the Integer
programming problem is reached. So go step 7; otherwise go to step 4.
4. Examine the constraints corresponding to the current optimal solution. For
each Basic Variable with non-integer solution in the current optimal table,
find the fractional part ,fi , Therefore, bi = [bi] + fi, where [bi] is the integer
part of bi, and fi is the fractional part of bi.
5. Choose the largest fraction among various fi ; i.e. Max (fi). Treat the
constraint corresponding to the maximum fraction as the source row
(equation). Based on the source equation, develop an additional constraint
(Gomory’s constraint / fractional cut) as shown:
 –fi = Si – Summation ((fi)(Non–Basic Variable))
6. Add the fractional cut as the last row in the latest optimal table and proceed
further using dual simplex method, and find the new optimum solution. If
the new optimum solution is integer then go to step 7; otherwise go to step
4.
7. Print the integer solution [X’s and Z – Values]
THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM
20
EXAMPLE:
Max. Z = 5X1 + 8X2
Subject to:
X1 + 2X2 ≤ 8
4X1 + X2 ≤ 10
X1, X2 ≥ 0 and integers
Standard Form:
Max. Z = 5X1 + 8X2 + 0S1 +0S2
Subject to:
X1 + 2X2 + S1 = 8
4X1 + X2 + S2 = 10
X1, X2, S1, and S2 ≥ 0 and integers
THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM
(Cont…)
21
Initial Table:
Iteration # 1:
Contribution Per Unit Cj 5 8 0 0
CBi
Basic Variables
(B)
X1 X2 S1 S2 SOLUTION Ratio
0 S1 1 2 1 0 8 8/2 = 4*
0 S2 4 1 0 1 10 10/1 = 10
Total Profit (Zj) 0 0 0 0 0
Net Contribution (Cj – Zj) 5 8* 0 0
Contribution Per Unit Cj 5 8 0 0
CBi
Basic Variables
(B)
X1 X2 S1 S2 SOLUTION Ratio
8 X2 1/2 1 1/2 0 4 8
0 S2 7/2 0 -1/2 1 6 12/7*
Total Profit (Zj) 4 8 4 0 32
Net Contribution (Cj – Zj) 1* 0 -4 0
THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM
(Cont…)
22
Iteration # 2:
All the Values of (Cj – Zj) ≤ 0; So, the current solution is optimal for linear
programming.
X1 = 12/7, X2 = 22/7 and Z = 236/7
Since the values of the decision variables X1 & X2 are not integers, so, the solution is
not optimum for Integer Programming.
STEP #4: Summary of Integer & Fractional Parts
Basic Variable in the
above Optimal table
bi [bi] + fi
X1 12/7 1 + (5/7)
X2 22/7 3 + (1/7)
THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM
(Cont…)
23
STEP # 5: Because, the fractional part,f1, is the maximum. So, Select the Row “X1”
as the Source row for developing first cut.
12/7 = X1 – 1/7S1 + 2/7S2  (1+ 5/7) = X1 + (–1+6/7)S1 + (0+2/7)S2
The Corresponding fractional cut is:
–fi = Si – Summation ((fi)(Non–Basic Variable))
–5/7 = S3 – 6/7S1 – 2/7S2
STEP # 6: This cut is added to the table which we get in Iteration # 2 (Optimal
Table Solution for Linear Programming); and further solved using dual simplex
method.
THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM
(Cont…)
24
Only the third row (Containing S3) has a negative solution value. Therefore, S3
(LEAVING Variable) leaves the basis.
For ENTERING Variable;
Ratio = (Cj – Zj) / (Pivot Row <0)
The smallest ratio is “1” and the corresponding variable is “S2”. So, the
variable “S2” enters the basis.
THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM
(Cont…)
25
Contribution Per Unit Cj 5 8 0 0 0
CBi Basic Variables (B) X1 X2 S1 S2 S3 SOLUTION
8 X2 0 1 1 0 - 1/2 7/2
5 X1 1 0 -1 0 1 1
0 S2 0 0 3 1 -7/2 5/2
Total Profit (Zj) 5 8 3 0 1 33
Net Contribution (Cj – Zj) 0 0 -3 0 -1
The Solution is still non-integer. So, develop a fractional cut. The Basic variables X2
and S2 are not integers.
STEP #4:
Basic Variable in the
above Optimal table
bi [bi] + fi
X2 7/2 3 + 1/2
S2 5/2 2 + 1/2
Summary of Integer & Fractional Parts
STEP # 5: Here, the fractional parts are the same for X2 & S2. But, we preferred the
fractional part of the X2. So, Select the Row “X2” as the Source row for developing
Cut.
THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM
(Cont…)
7/2 = X2 + S1 – 1/2S3  (3+ 1/2) = (1+0)X1 + (1+0)S1 + (–1+1/2)S3
The Corresponding fractional cut is:
–fi = Si – Summation ((fi)(Non–Basic Variable))
–1/2 = S4 – 1/2S3
STEP # 6: This cut is added to the above table; and further solved using dual
simplex method.
For ENTERING Variable;
Ratio = (Cj – Zj) / (Pivot Row <0)
The smallest positive ratio is “2” and the corresponding variable is “S3”. So, the
variable “S3” enters the basis.
THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM
(Cont…)
Contribution Per Unit Cj 5 8 0 0 0 0
CBi
Basic Variables
(B)
X1 X2 S1 S2 S3 S4 SOLUTION
8 X2 0 1 1 0 0 -1 4
5 X1 1 0 -1 0 0 2 0
0 S2 0 0 3 1 0 -7 6
0 S3 0 0 0 0 1 -2 1
Total Profit (Zj) 5 8 3 0 0 2 32
Net Contribution (Cj – Zj) 0 0 -3 0 0 -2
So, The values of all the basic variables are integers. So, the optimality is reached
and the corresponding results are summarized as follows:
X1 = 0, X2 = 4 and Z (Optimum) = 32
METHODS FOR SOLVING ILP
PROBLEMS
28
1. Rounding–Off A non–integer solution
2. Cutting–Plane Method
 (developed by: Ralph E. Gomory)
3. Branch–and–Bound Method
 (Developed By: A.H. Land and A. G. Doing)
4. The Additive algorithm for Zero–One integer
programming problems
 (Developed By: E. Balas)
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD
29
 Creates and solves a sequence of sub-problems to the original problem that
are increasingly more restrictive until an optimal solution is found
 BRANCHING:
 Selection of an integer value of a decision variable to examine for a possible
integer solution to a problem
 “If the solution to the linear programming problem contains non-integer values
for some or all decision variables, then the solution space is reduced by
introducing constraints with respect to any one of those decision variables. If
the value of the decision variable “X1” is 2.5, then two more problems will be
created by using each of the following constraints. X1 ≤ 2 and X1 ≥ 3.
 BOUND:
 An upper or lower limit on the value of the objective function at a given stage
of the analysis of an integer programming problem.
 LOWER BOUND: The lower bound at a node is the value of the objective
function corresponding to the truncated values (integer parts) of the decision
variables of the problem in that node.
 UPPER BOUND: The upper bound at a node is the value of the objective
function corresponding to the linear programming solution in that node.
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
30
 FATHOMED SUBPROBLEM / NODE: A problem is said to
be fathomed if any one of the following three conditions is
true:
1. The values of the decision variables of the problem are integer.
2. The upper bound of the problem which has non–integer values for its
decision variables is not greater than the current best lower bound.
3. The problem has infeasible solution.
This means that further branching from this type of fathomed nodes is
not necessary.
 CURRENT BEST LOWER BOUND: This is the best lower
bound (highest in the case of maximization problem and
lowest in the case of minimization problem) among the lower
bounds of all the fathomed nodes. Initially, it is assumed as
infinity for the root node.
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
BRANCH & BOUND ALGORITHM APPLIED TO MAXIMIZATION PROBLEM:
1.Solve the given linear programming problem graphically or using iterative
method. Set, the current best lower bound ZB as ∞.
2.Check, Whether the problem has integer solution. If yes, print the current
solution as the optimal solution and stop; Otherwise go to Step–3.
3.Identify the variable Xk which has the maximum fractional part as the branching
variable. (In case of tie, select the variable which has the highest objective
function coefficient.)
4.Create two more problems by including each of the following constraints to the
current problem and solve them.
a. Xk ≤ Integer part of Xk
b. Xk ≥ Next Integer of Xk
5.If any one of the new sub-problems has infeasible solution or fully integer
values for the decision variables, the corresponding node is fathomed. If a new
node has integer values for the decision variables, update the current best lower
bound as the lower bound of that node if its lower bound is greater than the
previous current best lower bound.
6.Are all terminal nodes fathomed? If answer is yes, go to step–7; otherwise,
identify the node with the highest lower bound and go to step–3.
7.Select the solution of the problem with respect to the fathomed node whose
lower bound is equal to the current best lower bound as the optimal solution.
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
Max. Z = 10X1 + 20X2
Subject to:
6X1 + 8X2 ≤ 48
X1 + 3X2 ≤ 12
X1, X2 ≥ 0 and integers
Z (A) = 10 (0) + 20 (0) = 0
Z(B) = 10 (8) + + 20 (0) = 80
Z(C) = 10 (24/5) + + 20 (12/5) = 96
Z(B) = 10 (0) + + 20 (4) = 80
 ZU = Upper bound = Z (Optimum) of
LP Problem.
 ZL = Lower bound w. r. t. the
truncated values of the decision
variables
 ZB = Current Best Lower Bound
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
In Problem (P1), X1 has the highest fractional part 4/5. Hence;
“X1” is selected for further branching.
The Problem P2 has the highest lower
bound (ZL ) of 90 among the unfathomed
terminal nodes. So, the further branching
is done from this node.
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
Feasible Region of P2 after
introduction X1 ≥ 5 to P1
Feasible Region of P3 after
introduction X1 ≤ 4 to P1
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
X1 = 16/3
X2 = 2
ZU = 93.33
ZL = 90
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
The Problem P7 has integer solution.
So, it is a fathomed node. Hence the
current best lower bound (ZB) is
updated to the objective function value
90.
The solution of P6 is non–integer and
its ZL = 80 and ZU = 90. Since, ZU ≤
(Current best ZL =90), the node P6 is
also fathomed and it has infeasible
solution in terms of not fulfilling integer
constraints for the decision variables.
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
Now, the Only unfathomed terminal node is P3. The further branching from this
node is shown below:
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
The problems P8 and P9 have integer solution. So,
these two nodes are fathomed.
But the objective function value of these nodes are
not greater than the current best lower bound of
90. Hence, the current best lower bound is not
updated.
Now, all the terminal nodes are fathomed. The
feasible fathomed node with the current best lower
bound is P7.
Hence, its solution is treated as the optimal
solution: X1=5, X2 =2, Z(Optimum) = 90
NOTE: This Problem has alternative optimum
solution at P8 with X1=3, X2=3, Z(Optimum)=90
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
Complete
Tree:
BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…)
PRACTICE QUESTION:
Max.: Z = 6X1 + 8X2
Subject to:
4X1 + 5X2 ≤ 22
5X1 + 8X2 ≤ 30
X1, X2 ≥ 0 and integers
METHODS FOR SOLVING ILP
PROBLEMS
43
1. Rounding–Off A non–integer solution
2. Cutting–Plane Method
 (developed by: Ralph E. Gomory)
3. Branch–and–Bound Method
 (Developed By: A.H. Land and A. G. Doing)
4. The Additive algorithm for Zero–One integer
programming problems
 (Developed By: E. Balas)
ZERO–ONE IMPLICIT ENUMERATION
TECHNIQUE / ADDITIVE ALGORITHM:
44
1. Convert the problem into the minimization form with all “≥” type constraints & all the
coefficients of the objective function must be in positive form.
2. Define a new variable Yj such that
Yj = Xj “if Cj ≥ 0 in the minimization problem”
Yj = 1–Xj “if Cj ≤ 0 in the minimization problem”
Where Yj is the binary variable in objective function as well as constraints. Slack variables Si
can be now added to constraints to put them into equality form.
A Branch & Bound procedure is used to solve the 0–1 programming problem.
SOLUTION VECTOR (S): A set of binary variables picked for the solution to be fixed (i.e.: either
(“+” or “1”) or (“–” or “0”). Initially it always be a NULL set.
VIOLATED CONSTRAINT VECTOR (V): All those constraints which are not feasible at
particular solution.
SET of HELPFUL VARIABLE (H): A variable is helpful if it doesn’t figure in solution vector (S)
either in “+” or “–” form and has positive coefficient in at least one violated constraint.”
BACK TRACK (FATHOMED SOLUTION): Backtrack occurs if any one of the following condition
occurs.
1. If Violated Constraint Vector (V) or Set of Helpful Variable (H) appear to be a NULL set.
2. If feasible solution found; When “V” is Null Set.
3. If we did not have the helpful variable from the atleast one of the violated constraints.
4. If Solution is infeasible.
TERMINATION CONDITION: When backtracking is not possible “means shifting from Zero (0)
to One(1) is not possible.”
ZERO–ONE IMPLICIT ENUMERATION
TECHNIQUE / ADDITIVE ALGORITHM:
45
EXAMPLE:
Minimization: Z = 5X1 + 6X2 + 10X3 + 7X4 + 19X5
Subject to:
5X1 + X2 + 3X3 – 4X4 + 3X5 ≥ 2
–2X1 + 5X2 – 2X3 – 3X4 + 4X5 ≥ 0
X1 – 2X2 – 5X3 + 3X4 + 4X5 ≥ 2
Xj = 0 or 1 for all j = 1,2,3,4,5
ITERATION # 1:
Z = ∞
S1 = { }
V1 = {1, 3}
H1 = {1,2,3,4,5}
ITERATION # 2:
S2 = { 5 }
V2 = { }
FEASIBLE SOLUTION
Fixed Solution X5 = 1, Z = 19
(Fathomed and Backtrack)
ITERATION # 3:
S3 = { 5–bar }
V3 = {1, 3}
H3 = {1,2,3,4}
ITERATION # 4:
S4 = { 5–bar, 1 }
V4 = {2, 3}
H4 = {2, 4}
ITERATION#5:
S5 = { 5–bar, 1, 2 }
V5 = { 3 }
H5 = { 4 }
ITERATION#6:
S6 = {5–bar, 1, 2, 4 }
V6 = { }
FEASIBLE SOLUTION
Fixed Solution X1=X2=X4=1, Z = 18
(Fathomed and Backtrack)
ZERO–ONE IMPLICIT ENUMERATION
TECHNIQUE / ADDITIVE ALGORITHM:
46
EXAMPLE: Minimization: Z = 5X1 + 6X2 + 10X3 + 7X4 + 19X5
Subject to:
5X1 + X2 + 3X3 – 4X4 + 3X5 ≥ 2
–2X1 + 5X2 – 2X3 – 3X4 + 4X5 ≥ 0
X1 – 2X2 – 5X3 + 3X4 + 4X5 ≥ 2
Xj = 0 or 1 for all j = 1,2,3,4,5
ITERATION # 7:
S7 = { 5–bar, 1, 2, 4–bar }
V7 = { 3 }
H7 = { }
(Fathomed and Backtrack)
ITERATION # 8:
S8 = { 5–bar, 1, 2–bar }
V8 = {2, 3}
H8 = {4}
“Because we did not have any helpful
variable from second constraints.”
(Fathomed and Backtrack)
ITERATION # 9:
S9 = { 5–bar, 1–bar }
V9 = {1, 3}
H9 = {2, 3, 4}
“BRACKTRACKING is not possible because in the
solution set S9 all the variables are fixed at Zero and
Violated constraints produced infeasible solution
through Helpful variables. So, Terminate the
Algorithm”
The Optimum Solution is X1=X2=X4=1, Z = 18
ZERO–ONE IMPLICIT ENUMERATION
TECHNIQUE / ADDITIVE ALGORITHM:
47
I–1
All at Zero But Not Fixed
Z = ∞
I–2
FEASIBLE
SOLUTION
Z = 19 at X5=1
(FATHOMED &
BACKTRACK)
X5=1
X5=0
I–3
I–4
I–5
I–6 I–7
I–8
I–9
X1=1 X1=0
X2=0X2=1
X4=1 X4=0
FEASIBLE SOLUTION
Z = 18 at X1=X2=X4=1
(FATHOMED & BACKTRACK)
(FATHOMED &
BACKTRACK)
(FATHOMED &
BACKTRACK)
(FATHOMED &
BACKTRACK) due
infeasibility: TERMINATE
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: PURE IP PROBLEM
HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY: The Company produces two products
popular with home renovators, old-fashioned chandeliers and ceiling fans
Both the chandeliers and fans require a two-step production process
involving wiring and assembly It takes about 2 hours to wire each
chandelier and 3 hours to wire a ceiling fan Final assembly of the
chandeliers and fans requires 6 and 5 hours respectively The production
capability is such that only 12 hours of wiring time and 30 hours of
assembly time are available Each chandelier produced nets the firm $7 and
each fan $6 Harrison’s production mix decision can be formulated using LP
as follows:
Maximize profit = $7X1 + $6X2
subject to 2X1 + 3X2 ≤ 12 (wiring hours)
6X1 + 5X2 ≤ 30 (assembly hours)
X1, X2 ≥ 0 (nonnegative)
where
X1 = number of chandeliers produced
X2 = number of ceiling fans produced
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: PURE IP PROBLEM (Cont…)
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: PURE IP PROBLEM (Cont…)
 Integer variables are specified with a drop-down menu in
Solver
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: PURE IP PROBLEM (Cont…)
 Excel solution to the Harrison Electric integer programming
model
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: MIXED IP PROBLEM
 Bagwell Chemical Company produces two industrial chemicals Xyline must be produced in 50-
pound bags Hexall is sold by the pound and can be produced in any quantity Both xyline and
hexall are composed of three ingredients – A, B, and C Bagwell sells xyline for $85 a bag and
hexall for $1.50 per pound
 Bagwell wants to maximize profit
 We let X = number of 50-pound bags of xyline
 We let Y = number of pounds of hexall
 This is a mixed-integer programming problem as Y is not required to be an integer
 The model is
Maximize profit = $85X + $1.50Y
subject to 30X + 0.5Y ≤ 2,000
30X + 0.5Y ≤ 800
30X + 0.5Y ≤ 200
X, Y ≤ 0 and X integer
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: MIXED IP PROBLEM
 Excel formulation of Bagwell’s IP problem with Solver
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: MIXED IP PROBLEM
 Excel solution to the Bagwell Chemical
problem
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: ZERO–ONE IP PROBLEM
 Simkin, Simkin, and Steinberg specialize in recommending oil stock portfolios for
wealthy clients
 One client has the following specifications
 At least two Texas firms must be in the portfolio
 No more than one investment can be made in a foreign oil company
 One of the two California oil stocks must be purchased
 The client has $3 million to invest and wants to buy large blocks of shares
 Oil investment opportunities
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: ZERO–ONE IP PROBLEM
 MODEL FORMULATION
Maximize return = 50X1 + 80X2 + 90X3 + 120X4 + 110X5 + 40X6 + 75X7
subject to
X1 + X4 + X5 ≥ 2 (Texas constraint)
X2+ X3 ≤ 1 (foreign oil constraint)
X6 + X7 = 1 (California constraint)
480X1 + 540X2 + 680X3 + 1,000X4 + 700X5
+ 510X6 + 900X7 ≤ 3,000 ($3 million limit)
All variables must be 0 or 1
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: ZERO–ONE IP PROBLEM
 Complete Solver input for Simkin’s 0-1 integer
programming problem
INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL
SOLVER: ZERO–ONE IP PROBLEM
 Excel solution to Simkin’s 0-1 integer programming
problem
INTEGER PROGRAMMING PROBLEMS
AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
 Integer programming problems do not readily lend
themselves to sensitivity analysis as only a
relatively few of the infinite solution possibilities in
a feasible solution space will meet integer
requirements.
 Trial-and-error examination of a range of
reasonable alternatives involving completely
solving each revised problem is required
QUESTIONS
60

More Related Content

What's hot

Simplex method: Slack, Surplus & Artificial variable
Simplex method:  Slack, Surplus & Artificial variableSimplex method:  Slack, Surplus & Artificial variable
Simplex method: Slack, Surplus & Artificial variableDevyaneeDevyanee2007
 
Linear Programming 1
Linear Programming 1Linear Programming 1
Linear Programming 1irsa javed
 
Integer Programming, Gomory
Integer Programming, GomoryInteger Programming, Gomory
Integer Programming, GomoryAVINASH JURIANI
 
Duality in Linear Programming
Duality in Linear ProgrammingDuality in Linear Programming
Duality in Linear Programmingjyothimonc
 
Operation research (definition, phases)
Operation research (definition, phases)Operation research (definition, phases)
Operation research (definition, phases)DivyaKS12
 
Linear programming using the simplex method
Linear programming using the simplex methodLinear programming using the simplex method
Linear programming using the simplex methodShivek Khurana
 
Special Cases in Simplex Method
Special Cases in Simplex MethodSpecial Cases in Simplex Method
Special Cases in Simplex MethodDivyansh Verma
 
3. linear programming senstivity analysis
3. linear programming senstivity analysis3. linear programming senstivity analysis
3. linear programming senstivity analysisHakeem-Ur- Rehman
 
Simplex Method
Simplex MethodSimplex Method
Simplex MethodSachin MK
 
Dynamic Programming
Dynamic ProgrammingDynamic Programming
Dynamic Programmingcontact2kazi
 
Sensitivity analysis in linear programming problem ( Muhammed Jiyad)
Sensitivity analysis in linear programming problem ( Muhammed Jiyad)Sensitivity analysis in linear programming problem ( Muhammed Jiyad)
Sensitivity analysis in linear programming problem ( Muhammed Jiyad)Muhammed Jiyad
 
Application of linear programming techniques to practical
Application of linear programming techniques to practicalApplication of linear programming techniques to practical
Application of linear programming techniques to practicalAlexander Decker
 
Formulation Lpp
Formulation  LppFormulation  Lpp
Formulation LppSachin MK
 
Bba 3274 qm week 10 integer programming
Bba 3274 qm week 10 integer programmingBba 3274 qm week 10 integer programming
Bba 3274 qm week 10 integer programmingStephen Ong
 
primal and dual problem
primal and dual problemprimal and dual problem
primal and dual problemYash Lad
 
Nonlinear programming 2013
Nonlinear programming 2013Nonlinear programming 2013
Nonlinear programming 2013sharifz
 

What's hot (20)

Simplex method: Slack, Surplus & Artificial variable
Simplex method:  Slack, Surplus & Artificial variableSimplex method:  Slack, Surplus & Artificial variable
Simplex method: Slack, Surplus & Artificial variable
 
Linear Programming 1
Linear Programming 1Linear Programming 1
Linear Programming 1
 
Linear programing
Linear programingLinear programing
Linear programing
 
Integer Programming, Gomory
Integer Programming, GomoryInteger Programming, Gomory
Integer Programming, Gomory
 
Unit.4.integer programming
Unit.4.integer programmingUnit.4.integer programming
Unit.4.integer programming
 
Duality in Linear Programming
Duality in Linear ProgrammingDuality in Linear Programming
Duality in Linear Programming
 
Linear programming
Linear programmingLinear programming
Linear programming
 
Operation research (definition, phases)
Operation research (definition, phases)Operation research (definition, phases)
Operation research (definition, phases)
 
Linear programming using the simplex method
Linear programming using the simplex methodLinear programming using the simplex method
Linear programming using the simplex method
 
Special Cases in Simplex Method
Special Cases in Simplex MethodSpecial Cases in Simplex Method
Special Cases in Simplex Method
 
3. linear programming senstivity analysis
3. linear programming senstivity analysis3. linear programming senstivity analysis
3. linear programming senstivity analysis
 
Simplex Method
Simplex MethodSimplex Method
Simplex Method
 
Dynamic Programming
Dynamic ProgrammingDynamic Programming
Dynamic Programming
 
Sensitivity analysis in linear programming problem ( Muhammed Jiyad)
Sensitivity analysis in linear programming problem ( Muhammed Jiyad)Sensitivity analysis in linear programming problem ( Muhammed Jiyad)
Sensitivity analysis in linear programming problem ( Muhammed Jiyad)
 
Application of linear programming techniques to practical
Application of linear programming techniques to practicalApplication of linear programming techniques to practical
Application of linear programming techniques to practical
 
5. transportation problems
5. transportation problems5. transportation problems
5. transportation problems
 
Formulation Lpp
Formulation  LppFormulation  Lpp
Formulation Lpp
 
Bba 3274 qm week 10 integer programming
Bba 3274 qm week 10 integer programmingBba 3274 qm week 10 integer programming
Bba 3274 qm week 10 integer programming
 
primal and dual problem
primal and dual problemprimal and dual problem
primal and dual problem
 
Nonlinear programming 2013
Nonlinear programming 2013Nonlinear programming 2013
Nonlinear programming 2013
 

Similar to Integer programming

Chapter 6-INTEGER PROGRAMMING note.pdf
Chapter 6-INTEGER PROGRAMMING  note.pdfChapter 6-INTEGER PROGRAMMING  note.pdf
Chapter 6-INTEGER PROGRAMMING note.pdfTsegay Berhe
 
Integer Programming PPt.ernxzamnbmbmspdf
Integer Programming PPt.ernxzamnbmbmspdfInteger Programming PPt.ernxzamnbmbmspdf
Integer Programming PPt.ernxzamnbmbmspdfRaja Manyam
 
Lecture - Linear Programming.pdf
Lecture - Linear Programming.pdfLecture - Linear Programming.pdf
Lecture - Linear Programming.pdflucky141651
 
A Real Life Application Of Linear Programming
A Real Life Application Of Linear ProgrammingA Real Life Application Of Linear Programming
A Real Life Application Of Linear ProgrammingTodd Turner
 
beyond linear programming: mathematical programming extensions
beyond linear programming: mathematical programming extensionsbeyond linear programming: mathematical programming extensions
beyond linear programming: mathematical programming extensionsAngelica Angelo Ocon
 
4. linear programming using excel solver
4. linear programming using excel solver4. linear programming using excel solver
4. linear programming using excel solverHakeem-Ur- Rehman
 
Vcs slides on or 2014
Vcs slides on or 2014Vcs slides on or 2014
Vcs slides on or 2014Shakti Ranjan
 
OR-I_Lecture_Note_01.pptx
OR-I_Lecture_Note_01.pptxOR-I_Lecture_Note_01.pptx
OR-I_Lecture_Note_01.pptxssuserf19f3e
 
370_13735_EA221_2010_1__1_1_Linear programming 1.ppt
370_13735_EA221_2010_1__1_1_Linear programming 1.ppt370_13735_EA221_2010_1__1_1_Linear programming 1.ppt
370_13735_EA221_2010_1__1_1_Linear programming 1.pptAbdiMuceeTube
 
BMGT 22 Week 14-17 - Linear Programming (Raw).pptx
BMGT 22 Week 14-17 - Linear Programming (Raw).pptxBMGT 22 Week 14-17 - Linear Programming (Raw).pptx
BMGT 22 Week 14-17 - Linear Programming (Raw).pptxRonnelJulSebastian
 
OR chapter 2.pdf
OR chapter 2.pdfOR chapter 2.pdf
OR chapter 2.pdfAlexHayme
 
5_2021_01_16!08_20_58_PM.pdf
5_2021_01_16!08_20_58_PM.pdf5_2021_01_16!08_20_58_PM.pdf
5_2021_01_16!08_20_58_PM.pdfTeshome62
 
chapter 2 revised.pptx
chapter 2 revised.pptxchapter 2 revised.pptx
chapter 2 revised.pptxDejeneDay
 
chapter 2 revised.pptx
chapter 2 revised.pptxchapter 2 revised.pptx
chapter 2 revised.pptxDejeneDay
 

Similar to Integer programming (20)

Chapter 6-INTEGER PROGRAMMING note.pdf
Chapter 6-INTEGER PROGRAMMING  note.pdfChapter 6-INTEGER PROGRAMMING  note.pdf
Chapter 6-INTEGER PROGRAMMING note.pdf
 
Integer Programming PPt.ernxzamnbmbmspdf
Integer Programming PPt.ernxzamnbmbmspdfInteger Programming PPt.ernxzamnbmbmspdf
Integer Programming PPt.ernxzamnbmbmspdf
 
Lecture - Linear Programming.pdf
Lecture - Linear Programming.pdfLecture - Linear Programming.pdf
Lecture - Linear Programming.pdf
 
A Real Life Application Of Linear Programming
A Real Life Application Of Linear ProgrammingA Real Life Application Of Linear Programming
A Real Life Application Of Linear Programming
 
beyond linear programming: mathematical programming extensions
beyond linear programming: mathematical programming extensionsbeyond linear programming: mathematical programming extensions
beyond linear programming: mathematical programming extensions
 
4. linear programming using excel solver
4. linear programming using excel solver4. linear programming using excel solver
4. linear programming using excel solver
 
Vcs slides on or 2014
Vcs slides on or 2014Vcs slides on or 2014
Vcs slides on or 2014
 
Operations research
Operations researchOperations research
Operations research
 
OR-I_Lecture_Note_01.pptx
OR-I_Lecture_Note_01.pptxOR-I_Lecture_Note_01.pptx
OR-I_Lecture_Note_01.pptx
 
370_13735_EA221_2010_1__1_1_Linear programming 1.ppt
370_13735_EA221_2010_1__1_1_Linear programming 1.ppt370_13735_EA221_2010_1__1_1_Linear programming 1.ppt
370_13735_EA221_2010_1__1_1_Linear programming 1.ppt
 
lp 2.ppt
lp 2.pptlp 2.ppt
lp 2.ppt
 
BMGT 22 Week 14-17 - Linear Programming (Raw).pptx
BMGT 22 Week 14-17 - Linear Programming (Raw).pptxBMGT 22 Week 14-17 - Linear Programming (Raw).pptx
BMGT 22 Week 14-17 - Linear Programming (Raw).pptx
 
OR_Hamdy_taha.ppt
OR_Hamdy_taha.pptOR_Hamdy_taha.ppt
OR_Hamdy_taha.ppt
 
OR_Hamdy_taha.ppt
OR_Hamdy_taha.pptOR_Hamdy_taha.ppt
OR_Hamdy_taha.ppt
 
OR chapter 2.pdf
OR chapter 2.pdfOR chapter 2.pdf
OR chapter 2.pdf
 
LPPmaal.pptx
LPPmaal.pptxLPPmaal.pptx
LPPmaal.pptx
 
5_2021_01_16!08_20_58_PM.pdf
5_2021_01_16!08_20_58_PM.pdf5_2021_01_16!08_20_58_PM.pdf
5_2021_01_16!08_20_58_PM.pdf
 
chapter 2 revised.pptx
chapter 2 revised.pptxchapter 2 revised.pptx
chapter 2 revised.pptx
 
chapter 2 revised.pptx
chapter 2 revised.pptxchapter 2 revised.pptx
chapter 2 revised.pptx
 
Rsh qam11 ch10 ge
Rsh qam11 ch10 geRsh qam11 ch10 ge
Rsh qam11 ch10 ge
 

More from Hakeem-Ur- Rehman

More from Hakeem-Ur- Rehman (20)

PM using P6
PM using P6PM using P6
PM using P6
 
Qfd house of quality
Qfd house of qualityQfd house of quality
Qfd house of quality
 
7. cqia (kaizen, 5 s, tpm)
7. cqia (kaizen, 5 s, tpm)7. cqia (kaizen, 5 s, tpm)
7. cqia (kaizen, 5 s, tpm)
 
2. cost of quality
2. cost of quality2. cost of quality
2. cost of quality
 
1.introduction to quality &amp; total quality management
1.introduction to quality &amp; total quality management1.introduction to quality &amp; total quality management
1.introduction to quality &amp; total quality management
 
Queueing theory
Queueing theoryQueueing theory
Queueing theory
 
Ilp modeling with excel
Ilp modeling with excelIlp modeling with excel
Ilp modeling with excel
 
Network analysis
Network analysisNetwork analysis
Network analysis
 
6. assignment problems
6. assignment problems6. assignment problems
6. assignment problems
 
5. advance topics in lp
5. advance topics in lp5. advance topics in lp
5. advance topics in lp
 
Into to simulation
Into to simulationInto to simulation
Into to simulation
 
Mendeley (new)
Mendeley (new)Mendeley (new)
Mendeley (new)
 
DEA
DEADEA
DEA
 
(Ntu talk) lean six sigma &amp; scholarship info.
(Ntu talk) lean six sigma &amp; scholarship info.(Ntu talk) lean six sigma &amp; scholarship info.
(Ntu talk) lean six sigma &amp; scholarship info.
 
Application of or for industrial engineers
Application of or for industrial engineersApplication of or for industrial engineers
Application of or for industrial engineers
 
Lean six sigma (green belt)new
Lean six sigma (green belt)newLean six sigma (green belt)new
Lean six sigma (green belt)new
 
Process improvement techniques
Process improvement techniquesProcess improvement techniques
Process improvement techniques
 
Production planning & control (PPC)
Production planning & control (PPC)Production planning & control (PPC)
Production planning & control (PPC)
 
2. lp iterative methods
2. lp   iterative methods2. lp   iterative methods
2. lp iterative methods
 
1. intro. to or &amp; lp
1. intro. to or &amp; lp1. intro. to or &amp; lp
1. intro. to or &amp; lp
 

Recently uploaded

POST ENCEPHALITIS case study Jitendra bhargav
POST ENCEPHALITIS case study  Jitendra bhargavPOST ENCEPHALITIS case study  Jitendra bhargav
POST ENCEPHALITIS case study Jitendra bhargavJitendra Bhargav
 
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - HK2 (...
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - HK2 (...HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - HK2 (...
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - HK2 (...Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
3.12.24 Freedom Summer in Mississippi.pptx
3.12.24 Freedom Summer in Mississippi.pptx3.12.24 Freedom Summer in Mississippi.pptx
3.12.24 Freedom Summer in Mississippi.pptxmary850239
 
Metabolism of lipoproteins & its disorders(Chylomicron & VLDL & LDL).pptx
Metabolism of  lipoproteins & its disorders(Chylomicron & VLDL & LDL).pptxMetabolism of  lipoproteins & its disorders(Chylomicron & VLDL & LDL).pptx
Metabolism of lipoproteins & its disorders(Chylomicron & VLDL & LDL).pptxDr. Santhosh Kumar. N
 
Arti Languages Pre Seed Send Ahead Pitchdeck 2024.pdf
Arti Languages Pre Seed Send Ahead Pitchdeck 2024.pdfArti Languages Pre Seed Send Ahead Pitchdeck 2024.pdf
Arti Languages Pre Seed Send Ahead Pitchdeck 2024.pdfwill854175
 
Pharmacology chapter No 7 full notes.pdf
Pharmacology chapter No 7 full notes.pdfPharmacology chapter No 7 full notes.pdf
Pharmacology chapter No 7 full notes.pdfSumit Tiwari
 
Plant Tissue culture., Plasticity, Totipotency, pptx
Plant Tissue culture., Plasticity, Totipotency, pptxPlant Tissue culture., Plasticity, Totipotency, pptx
Plant Tissue culture., Plasticity, Totipotency, pptxHimansu10
 
Quantitative research methodology and survey design
Quantitative research methodology and survey designQuantitative research methodology and survey design
Quantitative research methodology and survey designBalelaBoru
 
The OERs: Transforming Education for Sustainable Future by Dr. Sarita Anand
The OERs: Transforming Education for Sustainable Future by Dr. Sarita AnandThe OERs: Transforming Education for Sustainable Future by Dr. Sarita Anand
The OERs: Transforming Education for Sustainable Future by Dr. Sarita AnandDr. Sarita Anand
 
AI Uses and Misuses: Academic and Workplace Applications
AI Uses and Misuses: Academic and Workplace ApplicationsAI Uses and Misuses: Academic and Workplace Applications
AI Uses and Misuses: Academic and Workplace ApplicationsStella Lee
 
Riti theory by Vamana Indian poetics.pptx
Riti theory by Vamana Indian poetics.pptxRiti theory by Vamana Indian poetics.pptx
Riti theory by Vamana Indian poetics.pptxDhatriParmar
 
DNA and RNA , Structure, Functions, Types, difference, Similarities, Protein ...
DNA and RNA , Structure, Functions, Types, difference, Similarities, Protein ...DNA and RNA , Structure, Functions, Types, difference, Similarities, Protein ...
DNA and RNA , Structure, Functions, Types, difference, Similarities, Protein ...AKSHAYMAGAR17
 
LEAD5623 The Economics of Community Coll
LEAD5623 The Economics of Community CollLEAD5623 The Economics of Community Coll
LEAD5623 The Economics of Community CollDr. Bruce A. Johnson
 
3.14.24 Gender Discrimination and Gender Inequity.pptx
3.14.24 Gender Discrimination and Gender Inequity.pptx3.14.24 Gender Discrimination and Gender Inequity.pptx
3.14.24 Gender Discrimination and Gender Inequity.pptxmary850239
 
ASTRINGENTS.pdf Pharmacognosy chapter 5 diploma in Pharmacy
ASTRINGENTS.pdf Pharmacognosy chapter 5 diploma in PharmacyASTRINGENTS.pdf Pharmacognosy chapter 5 diploma in Pharmacy
ASTRINGENTS.pdf Pharmacognosy chapter 5 diploma in PharmacySumit Tiwari
 
Auchitya Theory by Kshemendra Indian Poetics
Auchitya Theory by Kshemendra Indian PoeticsAuchitya Theory by Kshemendra Indian Poetics
Auchitya Theory by Kshemendra Indian PoeticsDhatriParmar
 
Research Methodology and Tips on Better Research
Research Methodology and Tips on Better ResearchResearch Methodology and Tips on Better Research
Research Methodology and Tips on Better ResearchRushdi Shams
 
Metabolism , Metabolic Fate& disorders of cholesterol.pptx
Metabolism , Metabolic Fate& disorders of cholesterol.pptxMetabolism , Metabolic Fate& disorders of cholesterol.pptx
Metabolism , Metabolic Fate& disorders of cholesterol.pptxDr. Santhosh Kumar. N
 

Recently uploaded (20)

POST ENCEPHALITIS case study Jitendra bhargav
POST ENCEPHALITIS case study  Jitendra bhargavPOST ENCEPHALITIS case study  Jitendra bhargav
POST ENCEPHALITIS case study Jitendra bhargav
 
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - HK2 (...
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - HK2 (...HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - HK2 (...
HỌC TỐT TIẾNG ANH 11 THEO CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GLOBAL SUCCESS ĐÁP ÁN CHI TIẾT - HK2 (...
 
3.12.24 Freedom Summer in Mississippi.pptx
3.12.24 Freedom Summer in Mississippi.pptx3.12.24 Freedom Summer in Mississippi.pptx
3.12.24 Freedom Summer in Mississippi.pptx
 
Metabolism of lipoproteins & its disorders(Chylomicron & VLDL & LDL).pptx
Metabolism of  lipoproteins & its disorders(Chylomicron & VLDL & LDL).pptxMetabolism of  lipoproteins & its disorders(Chylomicron & VLDL & LDL).pptx
Metabolism of lipoproteins & its disorders(Chylomicron & VLDL & LDL).pptx
 
Arti Languages Pre Seed Send Ahead Pitchdeck 2024.pdf
Arti Languages Pre Seed Send Ahead Pitchdeck 2024.pdfArti Languages Pre Seed Send Ahead Pitchdeck 2024.pdf
Arti Languages Pre Seed Send Ahead Pitchdeck 2024.pdf
 
Pharmacology chapter No 7 full notes.pdf
Pharmacology chapter No 7 full notes.pdfPharmacology chapter No 7 full notes.pdf
Pharmacology chapter No 7 full notes.pdf
 
Plant Tissue culture., Plasticity, Totipotency, pptx
Plant Tissue culture., Plasticity, Totipotency, pptxPlant Tissue culture., Plasticity, Totipotency, pptx
Plant Tissue culture., Plasticity, Totipotency, pptx
 
Problems on Mean,Mode,Median Standard Deviation
Problems on Mean,Mode,Median Standard DeviationProblems on Mean,Mode,Median Standard Deviation
Problems on Mean,Mode,Median Standard Deviation
 
Quantitative research methodology and survey design
Quantitative research methodology and survey designQuantitative research methodology and survey design
Quantitative research methodology and survey design
 
The OERs: Transforming Education for Sustainable Future by Dr. Sarita Anand
The OERs: Transforming Education for Sustainable Future by Dr. Sarita AnandThe OERs: Transforming Education for Sustainable Future by Dr. Sarita Anand
The OERs: Transforming Education for Sustainable Future by Dr. Sarita Anand
 
AI Uses and Misuses: Academic and Workplace Applications
AI Uses and Misuses: Academic and Workplace ApplicationsAI Uses and Misuses: Academic and Workplace Applications
AI Uses and Misuses: Academic and Workplace Applications
 
Riti theory by Vamana Indian poetics.pptx
Riti theory by Vamana Indian poetics.pptxRiti theory by Vamana Indian poetics.pptx
Riti theory by Vamana Indian poetics.pptx
 
DNA and RNA , Structure, Functions, Types, difference, Similarities, Protein ...
DNA and RNA , Structure, Functions, Types, difference, Similarities, Protein ...DNA and RNA , Structure, Functions, Types, difference, Similarities, Protein ...
DNA and RNA , Structure, Functions, Types, difference, Similarities, Protein ...
 
LEAD5623 The Economics of Community Coll
LEAD5623 The Economics of Community CollLEAD5623 The Economics of Community Coll
LEAD5623 The Economics of Community Coll
 
3.14.24 Gender Discrimination and Gender Inequity.pptx
3.14.24 Gender Discrimination and Gender Inequity.pptx3.14.24 Gender Discrimination and Gender Inequity.pptx
3.14.24 Gender Discrimination and Gender Inequity.pptx
 
ASTRINGENTS.pdf Pharmacognosy chapter 5 diploma in Pharmacy
ASTRINGENTS.pdf Pharmacognosy chapter 5 diploma in PharmacyASTRINGENTS.pdf Pharmacognosy chapter 5 diploma in Pharmacy
ASTRINGENTS.pdf Pharmacognosy chapter 5 diploma in Pharmacy
 
Auchitya Theory by Kshemendra Indian Poetics
Auchitya Theory by Kshemendra Indian PoeticsAuchitya Theory by Kshemendra Indian Poetics
Auchitya Theory by Kshemendra Indian Poetics
 
Least Significance Difference:Biostatics and Research Methodology
Least Significance Difference:Biostatics and Research MethodologyLeast Significance Difference:Biostatics and Research Methodology
Least Significance Difference:Biostatics and Research Methodology
 
Research Methodology and Tips on Better Research
Research Methodology and Tips on Better ResearchResearch Methodology and Tips on Better Research
Research Methodology and Tips on Better Research
 
Metabolism , Metabolic Fate& disorders of cholesterol.pptx
Metabolism , Metabolic Fate& disorders of cholesterol.pptxMetabolism , Metabolic Fate& disorders of cholesterol.pptx
Metabolism , Metabolic Fate& disorders of cholesterol.pptx
 

Integer programming

  • 2. INTEGER PROGRAMMING: AN INTRODUCTION 2  An integer programming model is one where one or more of the decision variables has to take on an integer value in the final solution  Solving an integer programming problem is much more difficult than solving an LP problem  Even the fastest computers can take an excessively long time to solve big integer programming problems  If requiring integer values is the only way in which a problem deviates from a linear programming formulation, then it is an integer programming (IP) problem. (The more complete name is integer linear programming, but the adjective linear normally is dropped except when this problem is contrasted with the more esoteric integer nonlinear programming problem  So, The mathematical model for integer programming is the linear programming model with the one additional restriction that the variables must have integer values.
  • 3. TYPES OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING PROBLEMS  PURE-INTEGER PROBLEMS – require that all decision variables have integer solutions.  MIXED-INTEGER PROBLEMS – Require some, but not all, of the decision variables to have integer values in the final solution, whereas others need not have integer values.  0–1 INTEGER PROBLEMS – Require integer variables to have value of 0 or 1, such as situations in which decision variables are of the yes- no type.
  • 4. INTEGER PROGRAMMING: FORMULATION 4  Pure ILP Problem: A jewelery shop in the city specializes in ornaments and the manger has planned to limit the use of diamonds to the artistic configuration of diamond rings, diamond earnings and diamond necklaces. The three items require the following specifications: ORNAMENT DIAMOND ½ Carat ¼ Carat Ring 4 6 Earring (Pair) 3 5 Necklace 10 9 Availability 150 160 The jeweler does no want to configure the diamond into more than 50 items. The per unit profit for the rings is Rs. 1500, for earnings is Rs. 2400 and for necklace is Rs. 3600. Formulate the problem as an ILP model for maximizing the profit.
  • 5. INTEGER PROGRAMMING: FORMULATION 5  Decision Variables: Let X1 = Number of diamond rings, X2 = Number of pair of earrings, X1 = Number of necklaces  Objective Function: Max. Z = 1500X1 + 2400X2 + 3600X3 Subject to: 4X1 + 3X2 + 10X3 ≤ 150 (1/2 Carat Diamond) 6X1 + 5X2 + 9X3 ≤ 160 (1/4 Carat Diamond) X1 + X2 + X3 ≤ 50 (Total Number of items) With X1, X2, X3 ≥ 0; X1, X2, X3 are integers
  • 6. INTEGER PROGRAMMING: FORMULATION  Pure ILP Problem: Northeastern Airlines is considering the purchase of new long-, medium-, and short- range jet passenger airplanes. The purchase price would be $67 million for each long- range plane, $50 million for each medium-range plane, and $35 million for each short- range plane. The board of directors has authorized a maximum commitment of $1.5 billion for these purchases. Regardless of which airplanes are purchased, air travel of all distances is expected to be sufficiently large that these planes would be utilized at essentially maximum capacity. It is estimated that the net annual profit (after capital recovery costs are subtracted) would be $4.2 million per long-range plane, $3 million per medium-range plane, and $2.3 million per short-range plane. It is predicted that enough trained pilots will be available to the company to crew 30 new airplanes. If only short-range planes were purchased, the maintenance facilities would be able to handle 40 new planes. However, each medium-range plane is equivalent to 4/3 short-range planes, and each long-range plane is equivalent to 5/3 short-range planes in terms of their use of the maintenance facilities. The information given here was obtained by a preliminary analysis of the problem. A more detailed analysis will be conducted subsequently. However, using the preceding data as a first approximation, management wishes to know how many planes of each type should be purchased to maximize profit. Formulate an IP model for this problem.
  • 8. INTEGER PROGRAMMING: FORMULATION 8  Mixed ILP Problem: A textile company can use any or all of three different processes for weaving in standard white polyester fabric. Each of these production processes has a weaving machine setup cost and per square-meter processing cost. These costs and the capacities of each of the three production processes are shown below: Process Number Weaving machine Set –Up cost (Rs.) Processing Cost (Rs.) Maximum daily capacity (Sq. meter) 1 150 15 2000 2 240 10 3000 3 300 8 3500 The daily demand forecasts for its white polyester fabric is 4000 Sq. meter. The company’s production manager wants to determine the optimal combination of the production processes and their actual daily production levels such that the total production cost is minimized.
  • 9. INTEGER PROGRAMMING: FORMULATION 9  Decision Variables: Let Xj be the production level for process j (j = 1, 2, 3) also let  Yj = 1 if process j is used, and  Yj = 0 if process j is not used  Objective Function:  Minimize Z = (15X1 + 10X2 + 8X3) + (150Y1 + 240Y2 + 300Y3 ) Subject to: X1 + X2 + X3 = 4000 (Daily Diamond) X1 – 2000Y1 ≤ 0 (Daily Capacity of Process-1) X2 – 3000Y2 ≤ 0 (Daily Capacity of Process-2) X3 – 3500Y3 ≤ 0 (Daily Capacity of Process-3) With X1, X2, X3 ≥ 0; Yj = 0 or 1, j= 1, 2, 3
  • 10. INTEGER PROGRAMMING: FORMULATION 10  Zero–One ILP Problem: A real estate development firm, Peterson and Johnson, is considering five possible development projects. The following table shows the estimated long- run profit (net present value) that each project would generate, as well as the amount of investment required to undertake the project, in units of millions of dollars. The owners of the firm, Dave Peterson and Ron Johnson, have raised $20 million of investment capital for these projects. Dave and Ron now want to select the combination of projects that will maximize their total estimated long-run profit (net present value) without investing more that $20 million. Formulate a Binary Integer Programming (0–1) model for this problem.
  • 12. METHODS FOR SOLVING ILP PROBLEMS 12 1. Rounding–Off A non–integer solution 2. Cutting–Plane Method  (developed by: Ralph E. Gomory) 3. Branch–and–Bound Method  (Developed By: A.H. Land and A. G. Doing) 4. The Additive algorithm for Zero–One integer programming problems  (Developed By: E. Balas)
  • 13. HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING The Company produces two products popular with home renovators, old- fashioned chandeliers and ceiling fans Both the chandeliers and fans require a two-step production process involving wiring and assembly It takes about 2 hours to wire each chandelier and 3 hours to wire a ceiling fan Final assembly of the chandeliers and fans requires 6 and 5 hours respectively The production capability is such that only 12 hours of wiring time and 30 hours of assembly time are available Each chandelier produced nets the firm $7 and each fan $6 Harrison’s production mix decision can be formulated using LP as follows: Maximize profit = $7X1 + $6X2 subject to 2X1 + 3X2 ≤ 12 (wiring hours) 6X1 + 5X2 ≤ 30 (assembly hours) X1, X2 ≥ 0 (nonnegative) where X1 = number of chandeliers produced X2 = number of ceiling fans produced
  • 14. HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING • The Harrison Electric Problem 6 – 5 – 4 – 3 – 2 – 1 – 0 –| | | | | | | 1 2 3 4 5 6 X1 X2 + ++ ++++ + 6X1 + 5X2 ≤ 30 2X1 + 3X2 ≤ 12 + = Possible Integer Solution Optimal LP Solution (X1 =3.75, X2 = 1.5, Profit = $35.25)
  • 15. HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING  The production planner Wes recognizes this is an integer problem  His first attempt at solving it is to round the values to X1 = 4 and X2 = 2  However, this is not feasible  Rounding X2 down to 1 gives a feasible solution, but it may not be optimal  This could be solved using the enumeration method  Enumeration is generally not possible for large problems
  • 16. HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING • INTEGER SOLUTIONS CHANDELIERS (X1) CEILING FANS (X2) PROFIT ($7X1 + $6X2) 0 0 $0 1 0 7 2 0 14 3 0 21 4 0 28 5 0 35 0 1 6 1 1 13 2 1 20 3 1 27 4 1 34 0 2 12 1 2 19 2 2 26 3 2 33 0 3 18 1 3 25 0 4 24 Optimal solution to integer programming problem Solution if rounding is used
  • 17. HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMPLE OF INTEGER PROGRAMMING  The rounding solution of X1 = 4, X2 = 1 gives a profit of $34  The optimal solution of X1 = 5, X2 = 0 gives a profit of $35  The optimal integer solution is less than the optimal LP solution  An integer solution can never be better than the LP solution and is usually a lesser solution
  • 18. METHODS FOR SOLVING ILP PROBLEMS 18 1. Rounding–Off A non–integer solution 2. Cutting–Plane Method  (developed by: Ralph E. Gomory) 3. Branch–and–Bound Method  (Developed By: A.H. Land and A. G. Doing) 4. The Additive algorithm for Zero–One integer programming problems  (Developed By: E. Balas)
  • 19. THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM 19 An Algorithm for solving Pure integer and mixed integer programming problems has been developed by Ralph E. Gomory 1. Relax the integer requirements. 2. Solve the resulting LP problem using Simplex Method. 3. If all the basic variables have integer values, Optimality of the Integer programming problem is reached. So go step 7; otherwise go to step 4. 4. Examine the constraints corresponding to the current optimal solution. For each Basic Variable with non-integer solution in the current optimal table, find the fractional part ,fi , Therefore, bi = [bi] + fi, where [bi] is the integer part of bi, and fi is the fractional part of bi. 5. Choose the largest fraction among various fi ; i.e. Max (fi). Treat the constraint corresponding to the maximum fraction as the source row (equation). Based on the source equation, develop an additional constraint (Gomory’s constraint / fractional cut) as shown:  –fi = Si – Summation ((fi)(Non–Basic Variable)) 6. Add the fractional cut as the last row in the latest optimal table and proceed further using dual simplex method, and find the new optimum solution. If the new optimum solution is integer then go to step 7; otherwise go to step 4. 7. Print the integer solution [X’s and Z – Values]
  • 20. THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM 20 EXAMPLE: Max. Z = 5X1 + 8X2 Subject to: X1 + 2X2 ≤ 8 4X1 + X2 ≤ 10 X1, X2 ≥ 0 and integers Standard Form: Max. Z = 5X1 + 8X2 + 0S1 +0S2 Subject to: X1 + 2X2 + S1 = 8 4X1 + X2 + S2 = 10 X1, X2, S1, and S2 ≥ 0 and integers
  • 21. THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM (Cont…) 21 Initial Table: Iteration # 1: Contribution Per Unit Cj 5 8 0 0 CBi Basic Variables (B) X1 X2 S1 S2 SOLUTION Ratio 0 S1 1 2 1 0 8 8/2 = 4* 0 S2 4 1 0 1 10 10/1 = 10 Total Profit (Zj) 0 0 0 0 0 Net Contribution (Cj – Zj) 5 8* 0 0 Contribution Per Unit Cj 5 8 0 0 CBi Basic Variables (B) X1 X2 S1 S2 SOLUTION Ratio 8 X2 1/2 1 1/2 0 4 8 0 S2 7/2 0 -1/2 1 6 12/7* Total Profit (Zj) 4 8 4 0 32 Net Contribution (Cj – Zj) 1* 0 -4 0
  • 22. THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM (Cont…) 22 Iteration # 2: All the Values of (Cj – Zj) ≤ 0; So, the current solution is optimal for linear programming. X1 = 12/7, X2 = 22/7 and Z = 236/7 Since the values of the decision variables X1 & X2 are not integers, so, the solution is not optimum for Integer Programming. STEP #4: Summary of Integer & Fractional Parts Basic Variable in the above Optimal table bi [bi] + fi X1 12/7 1 + (5/7) X2 22/7 3 + (1/7)
  • 23. THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM (Cont…) 23 STEP # 5: Because, the fractional part,f1, is the maximum. So, Select the Row “X1” as the Source row for developing first cut. 12/7 = X1 – 1/7S1 + 2/7S2  (1+ 5/7) = X1 + (–1+6/7)S1 + (0+2/7)S2 The Corresponding fractional cut is: –fi = Si – Summation ((fi)(Non–Basic Variable)) –5/7 = S3 – 6/7S1 – 2/7S2 STEP # 6: This cut is added to the table which we get in Iteration # 2 (Optimal Table Solution for Linear Programming); and further solved using dual simplex method.
  • 24. THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM (Cont…) 24 Only the third row (Containing S3) has a negative solution value. Therefore, S3 (LEAVING Variable) leaves the basis. For ENTERING Variable; Ratio = (Cj – Zj) / (Pivot Row <0) The smallest ratio is “1” and the corresponding variable is “S2”. So, the variable “S2” enters the basis.
  • 25. THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM (Cont…) 25 Contribution Per Unit Cj 5 8 0 0 0 CBi Basic Variables (B) X1 X2 S1 S2 S3 SOLUTION 8 X2 0 1 1 0 - 1/2 7/2 5 X1 1 0 -1 0 1 1 0 S2 0 0 3 1 -7/2 5/2 Total Profit (Zj) 5 8 3 0 1 33 Net Contribution (Cj – Zj) 0 0 -3 0 -1 The Solution is still non-integer. So, develop a fractional cut. The Basic variables X2 and S2 are not integers. STEP #4: Basic Variable in the above Optimal table bi [bi] + fi X2 7/2 3 + 1/2 S2 5/2 2 + 1/2 Summary of Integer & Fractional Parts STEP # 5: Here, the fractional parts are the same for X2 & S2. But, we preferred the fractional part of the X2. So, Select the Row “X2” as the Source row for developing Cut.
  • 26. THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM (Cont…) 7/2 = X2 + S1 – 1/2S3  (3+ 1/2) = (1+0)X1 + (1+0)S1 + (–1+1/2)S3 The Corresponding fractional cut is: –fi = Si – Summation ((fi)(Non–Basic Variable)) –1/2 = S4 – 1/2S3 STEP # 6: This cut is added to the above table; and further solved using dual simplex method. For ENTERING Variable; Ratio = (Cj – Zj) / (Pivot Row <0) The smallest positive ratio is “2” and the corresponding variable is “S3”. So, the variable “S3” enters the basis.
  • 27. THE CUTTING–PLANE ALGORITHM (Cont…) Contribution Per Unit Cj 5 8 0 0 0 0 CBi Basic Variables (B) X1 X2 S1 S2 S3 S4 SOLUTION 8 X2 0 1 1 0 0 -1 4 5 X1 1 0 -1 0 0 2 0 0 S2 0 0 3 1 0 -7 6 0 S3 0 0 0 0 1 -2 1 Total Profit (Zj) 5 8 3 0 0 2 32 Net Contribution (Cj – Zj) 0 0 -3 0 0 -2 So, The values of all the basic variables are integers. So, the optimality is reached and the corresponding results are summarized as follows: X1 = 0, X2 = 4 and Z (Optimum) = 32
  • 28. METHODS FOR SOLVING ILP PROBLEMS 28 1. Rounding–Off A non–integer solution 2. Cutting–Plane Method  (developed by: Ralph E. Gomory) 3. Branch–and–Bound Method  (Developed By: A.H. Land and A. G. Doing) 4. The Additive algorithm for Zero–One integer programming problems  (Developed By: E. Balas)
  • 29. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD 29  Creates and solves a sequence of sub-problems to the original problem that are increasingly more restrictive until an optimal solution is found  BRANCHING:  Selection of an integer value of a decision variable to examine for a possible integer solution to a problem  “If the solution to the linear programming problem contains non-integer values for some or all decision variables, then the solution space is reduced by introducing constraints with respect to any one of those decision variables. If the value of the decision variable “X1” is 2.5, then two more problems will be created by using each of the following constraints. X1 ≤ 2 and X1 ≥ 3.  BOUND:  An upper or lower limit on the value of the objective function at a given stage of the analysis of an integer programming problem.  LOWER BOUND: The lower bound at a node is the value of the objective function corresponding to the truncated values (integer parts) of the decision variables of the problem in that node.  UPPER BOUND: The upper bound at a node is the value of the objective function corresponding to the linear programming solution in that node.
  • 30. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) 30  FATHOMED SUBPROBLEM / NODE: A problem is said to be fathomed if any one of the following three conditions is true: 1. The values of the decision variables of the problem are integer. 2. The upper bound of the problem which has non–integer values for its decision variables is not greater than the current best lower bound. 3. The problem has infeasible solution. This means that further branching from this type of fathomed nodes is not necessary.  CURRENT BEST LOWER BOUND: This is the best lower bound (highest in the case of maximization problem and lowest in the case of minimization problem) among the lower bounds of all the fathomed nodes. Initially, it is assumed as infinity for the root node.
  • 31. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) BRANCH & BOUND ALGORITHM APPLIED TO MAXIMIZATION PROBLEM: 1.Solve the given linear programming problem graphically or using iterative method. Set, the current best lower bound ZB as ∞. 2.Check, Whether the problem has integer solution. If yes, print the current solution as the optimal solution and stop; Otherwise go to Step–3. 3.Identify the variable Xk which has the maximum fractional part as the branching variable. (In case of tie, select the variable which has the highest objective function coefficient.) 4.Create two more problems by including each of the following constraints to the current problem and solve them. a. Xk ≤ Integer part of Xk b. Xk ≥ Next Integer of Xk 5.If any one of the new sub-problems has infeasible solution or fully integer values for the decision variables, the corresponding node is fathomed. If a new node has integer values for the decision variables, update the current best lower bound as the lower bound of that node if its lower bound is greater than the previous current best lower bound. 6.Are all terminal nodes fathomed? If answer is yes, go to step–7; otherwise, identify the node with the highest lower bound and go to step–3. 7.Select the solution of the problem with respect to the fathomed node whose lower bound is equal to the current best lower bound as the optimal solution.
  • 32. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) Max. Z = 10X1 + 20X2 Subject to: 6X1 + 8X2 ≤ 48 X1 + 3X2 ≤ 12 X1, X2 ≥ 0 and integers Z (A) = 10 (0) + 20 (0) = 0 Z(B) = 10 (8) + + 20 (0) = 80 Z(C) = 10 (24/5) + + 20 (12/5) = 96 Z(B) = 10 (0) + + 20 (4) = 80  ZU = Upper bound = Z (Optimum) of LP Problem.  ZL = Lower bound w. r. t. the truncated values of the decision variables  ZB = Current Best Lower Bound
  • 33. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) In Problem (P1), X1 has the highest fractional part 4/5. Hence; “X1” is selected for further branching. The Problem P2 has the highest lower bound (ZL ) of 90 among the unfathomed terminal nodes. So, the further branching is done from this node.
  • 34. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) Feasible Region of P2 after introduction X1 ≥ 5 to P1 Feasible Region of P3 after introduction X1 ≤ 4 to P1
  • 35. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) X1 = 16/3 X2 = 2 ZU = 93.33 ZL = 90
  • 38. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) The Problem P7 has integer solution. So, it is a fathomed node. Hence the current best lower bound (ZB) is updated to the objective function value 90. The solution of P6 is non–integer and its ZL = 80 and ZU = 90. Since, ZU ≤ (Current best ZL =90), the node P6 is also fathomed and it has infeasible solution in terms of not fulfilling integer constraints for the decision variables.
  • 39. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) Now, the Only unfathomed terminal node is P3. The further branching from this node is shown below:
  • 40. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) The problems P8 and P9 have integer solution. So, these two nodes are fathomed. But the objective function value of these nodes are not greater than the current best lower bound of 90. Hence, the current best lower bound is not updated. Now, all the terminal nodes are fathomed. The feasible fathomed node with the current best lower bound is P7. Hence, its solution is treated as the optimal solution: X1=5, X2 =2, Z(Optimum) = 90 NOTE: This Problem has alternative optimum solution at P8 with X1=3, X2=3, Z(Optimum)=90
  • 42. BRANCH–AND–BOUND METHOD (Cont…) PRACTICE QUESTION: Max.: Z = 6X1 + 8X2 Subject to: 4X1 + 5X2 ≤ 22 5X1 + 8X2 ≤ 30 X1, X2 ≥ 0 and integers
  • 43. METHODS FOR SOLVING ILP PROBLEMS 43 1. Rounding–Off A non–integer solution 2. Cutting–Plane Method  (developed by: Ralph E. Gomory) 3. Branch–and–Bound Method  (Developed By: A.H. Land and A. G. Doing) 4. The Additive algorithm for Zero–One integer programming problems  (Developed By: E. Balas)
  • 44. ZERO–ONE IMPLICIT ENUMERATION TECHNIQUE / ADDITIVE ALGORITHM: 44 1. Convert the problem into the minimization form with all “≥” type constraints & all the coefficients of the objective function must be in positive form. 2. Define a new variable Yj such that Yj = Xj “if Cj ≥ 0 in the minimization problem” Yj = 1–Xj “if Cj ≤ 0 in the minimization problem” Where Yj is the binary variable in objective function as well as constraints. Slack variables Si can be now added to constraints to put them into equality form. A Branch & Bound procedure is used to solve the 0–1 programming problem. SOLUTION VECTOR (S): A set of binary variables picked for the solution to be fixed (i.e.: either (“+” or “1”) or (“–” or “0”). Initially it always be a NULL set. VIOLATED CONSTRAINT VECTOR (V): All those constraints which are not feasible at particular solution. SET of HELPFUL VARIABLE (H): A variable is helpful if it doesn’t figure in solution vector (S) either in “+” or “–” form and has positive coefficient in at least one violated constraint.” BACK TRACK (FATHOMED SOLUTION): Backtrack occurs if any one of the following condition occurs. 1. If Violated Constraint Vector (V) or Set of Helpful Variable (H) appear to be a NULL set. 2. If feasible solution found; When “V” is Null Set. 3. If we did not have the helpful variable from the atleast one of the violated constraints. 4. If Solution is infeasible. TERMINATION CONDITION: When backtracking is not possible “means shifting from Zero (0) to One(1) is not possible.”
  • 45. ZERO–ONE IMPLICIT ENUMERATION TECHNIQUE / ADDITIVE ALGORITHM: 45 EXAMPLE: Minimization: Z = 5X1 + 6X2 + 10X3 + 7X4 + 19X5 Subject to: 5X1 + X2 + 3X3 – 4X4 + 3X5 ≥ 2 –2X1 + 5X2 – 2X3 – 3X4 + 4X5 ≥ 0 X1 – 2X2 – 5X3 + 3X4 + 4X5 ≥ 2 Xj = 0 or 1 for all j = 1,2,3,4,5 ITERATION # 1: Z = ∞ S1 = { } V1 = {1, 3} H1 = {1,2,3,4,5} ITERATION # 2: S2 = { 5 } V2 = { } FEASIBLE SOLUTION Fixed Solution X5 = 1, Z = 19 (Fathomed and Backtrack) ITERATION # 3: S3 = { 5–bar } V3 = {1, 3} H3 = {1,2,3,4} ITERATION # 4: S4 = { 5–bar, 1 } V4 = {2, 3} H4 = {2, 4} ITERATION#5: S5 = { 5–bar, 1, 2 } V5 = { 3 } H5 = { 4 } ITERATION#6: S6 = {5–bar, 1, 2, 4 } V6 = { } FEASIBLE SOLUTION Fixed Solution X1=X2=X4=1, Z = 18 (Fathomed and Backtrack)
  • 46. ZERO–ONE IMPLICIT ENUMERATION TECHNIQUE / ADDITIVE ALGORITHM: 46 EXAMPLE: Minimization: Z = 5X1 + 6X2 + 10X3 + 7X4 + 19X5 Subject to: 5X1 + X2 + 3X3 – 4X4 + 3X5 ≥ 2 –2X1 + 5X2 – 2X3 – 3X4 + 4X5 ≥ 0 X1 – 2X2 – 5X3 + 3X4 + 4X5 ≥ 2 Xj = 0 or 1 for all j = 1,2,3,4,5 ITERATION # 7: S7 = { 5–bar, 1, 2, 4–bar } V7 = { 3 } H7 = { } (Fathomed and Backtrack) ITERATION # 8: S8 = { 5–bar, 1, 2–bar } V8 = {2, 3} H8 = {4} “Because we did not have any helpful variable from second constraints.” (Fathomed and Backtrack) ITERATION # 9: S9 = { 5–bar, 1–bar } V9 = {1, 3} H9 = {2, 3, 4} “BRACKTRACKING is not possible because in the solution set S9 all the variables are fixed at Zero and Violated constraints produced infeasible solution through Helpful variables. So, Terminate the Algorithm” The Optimum Solution is X1=X2=X4=1, Z = 18
  • 47. ZERO–ONE IMPLICIT ENUMERATION TECHNIQUE / ADDITIVE ALGORITHM: 47 I–1 All at Zero But Not Fixed Z = ∞ I–2 FEASIBLE SOLUTION Z = 19 at X5=1 (FATHOMED & BACKTRACK) X5=1 X5=0 I–3 I–4 I–5 I–6 I–7 I–8 I–9 X1=1 X1=0 X2=0X2=1 X4=1 X4=0 FEASIBLE SOLUTION Z = 18 at X1=X2=X4=1 (FATHOMED & BACKTRACK) (FATHOMED & BACKTRACK) (FATHOMED & BACKTRACK) (FATHOMED & BACKTRACK) due infeasibility: TERMINATE
  • 48. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: PURE IP PROBLEM HARRISON ELECTRIC COMPANY: The Company produces two products popular with home renovators, old-fashioned chandeliers and ceiling fans Both the chandeliers and fans require a two-step production process involving wiring and assembly It takes about 2 hours to wire each chandelier and 3 hours to wire a ceiling fan Final assembly of the chandeliers and fans requires 6 and 5 hours respectively The production capability is such that only 12 hours of wiring time and 30 hours of assembly time are available Each chandelier produced nets the firm $7 and each fan $6 Harrison’s production mix decision can be formulated using LP as follows: Maximize profit = $7X1 + $6X2 subject to 2X1 + 3X2 ≤ 12 (wiring hours) 6X1 + 5X2 ≤ 30 (assembly hours) X1, X2 ≥ 0 (nonnegative) where X1 = number of chandeliers produced X2 = number of ceiling fans produced
  • 49. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: PURE IP PROBLEM (Cont…)
  • 50. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: PURE IP PROBLEM (Cont…)  Integer variables are specified with a drop-down menu in Solver
  • 51. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: PURE IP PROBLEM (Cont…)  Excel solution to the Harrison Electric integer programming model
  • 52. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: MIXED IP PROBLEM  Bagwell Chemical Company produces two industrial chemicals Xyline must be produced in 50- pound bags Hexall is sold by the pound and can be produced in any quantity Both xyline and hexall are composed of three ingredients – A, B, and C Bagwell sells xyline for $85 a bag and hexall for $1.50 per pound  Bagwell wants to maximize profit  We let X = number of 50-pound bags of xyline  We let Y = number of pounds of hexall  This is a mixed-integer programming problem as Y is not required to be an integer  The model is Maximize profit = $85X + $1.50Y subject to 30X + 0.5Y ≤ 2,000 30X + 0.5Y ≤ 800 30X + 0.5Y ≤ 200 X, Y ≤ 0 and X integer
  • 53. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: MIXED IP PROBLEM  Excel formulation of Bagwell’s IP problem with Solver
  • 54. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: MIXED IP PROBLEM  Excel solution to the Bagwell Chemical problem
  • 55. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: ZERO–ONE IP PROBLEM  Simkin, Simkin, and Steinberg specialize in recommending oil stock portfolios for wealthy clients  One client has the following specifications  At least two Texas firms must be in the portfolio  No more than one investment can be made in a foreign oil company  One of the two California oil stocks must be purchased  The client has $3 million to invest and wants to buy large blocks of shares  Oil investment opportunities
  • 56. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: ZERO–ONE IP PROBLEM  MODEL FORMULATION Maximize return = 50X1 + 80X2 + 90X3 + 120X4 + 110X5 + 40X6 + 75X7 subject to X1 + X4 + X5 ≥ 2 (Texas constraint) X2+ X3 ≤ 1 (foreign oil constraint) X6 + X7 = 1 (California constraint) 480X1 + 540X2 + 680X3 + 1,000X4 + 700X5 + 510X6 + 900X7 ≤ 3,000 ($3 million limit) All variables must be 0 or 1
  • 57. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: ZERO–ONE IP PROBLEM  Complete Solver input for Simkin’s 0-1 integer programming problem
  • 58. INTEGER PROGRAMMING USING EXCEL SOLVER: ZERO–ONE IP PROBLEM  Excel solution to Simkin’s 0-1 integer programming problem
  • 59. INTEGER PROGRAMMING PROBLEMS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS  Integer programming problems do not readily lend themselves to sensitivity analysis as only a relatively few of the infinite solution possibilities in a feasible solution space will meet integer requirements.  Trial-and-error examination of a range of reasonable alternatives involving completely solving each revised problem is required