旅行商问题精确与近似方法的比较解

IF 0.1 Q4 ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
A. Chandra, C. Natalia, Aulia Naro
{"title":"旅行商问题精确与近似方法的比较解","authors":"A. Chandra, C. Natalia, Aulia Naro","doi":"10.21501/21454086.3804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are two major optimization methods: Exact and Approximate methods. A well known exact method, Branch and Bound algorithm (B&B) and approximate methods, Elimination-based Fruit Fly Optimization Algorithm (EFOA) and Artificial Atom Algorithm (A3) are used for solving the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP). For 56 destinations, the results of total distance, processing time, and the deviation between exact and approximate method will be compared where the distance between two destinations is a Euclidean distance and this study shows that the distance of B&B is 270 , EFOA is 270 and A3 is 288.38 which deviates 6.81%. For time processing aspect, B&B needs 12.5 days to process, EFOA needs 36.59 seconds, A3 needs 35.34 seconds. But for 29 destinations, exact method is more powerful than approximate method.","PeriodicalId":53826,"journal":{"name":"Revista Digital Lampsakos","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Solutions of Exact and Approximate Methods for Traveling Salesman Problem\",\"authors\":\"A. Chandra, C. Natalia, Aulia Naro\",\"doi\":\"10.21501/21454086.3804\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There are two major optimization methods: Exact and Approximate methods. A well known exact method, Branch and Bound algorithm (B&B) and approximate methods, Elimination-based Fruit Fly Optimization Algorithm (EFOA) and Artificial Atom Algorithm (A3) are used for solving the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP). For 56 destinations, the results of total distance, processing time, and the deviation between exact and approximate method will be compared where the distance between two destinations is a Euclidean distance and this study shows that the distance of B&B is 270 , EFOA is 270 and A3 is 288.38 which deviates 6.81%. For time processing aspect, B&B needs 12.5 days to process, EFOA needs 36.59 seconds, A3 needs 35.34 seconds. But for 29 destinations, exact method is more powerful than approximate method.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53826,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Digital Lampsakos\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Digital Lampsakos\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21501/21454086.3804\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Digital Lampsakos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21501/21454086.3804","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有两种主要的优化方法:精确法和近似法。求解旅行商问题(TSP)的方法主要有精确方法、分支定界算法(B&B)和近似方法、基于消除的果蝇优化算法(EFOA)和人工原子算法(A3)。对于56个目的地,将比较总距离、处理时间以及精确法与近似法的偏差结果,其中两个目的地之间的距离为欧几里得距离,本研究表明B&B的距离为270,EFOA为270,A3为288.38,偏差为6.81%。在时间处理方面,B&B需要12.5天处理,EFOA需要36.59秒,A3需要35.34秒。但对于29个目的地,精确方法比近似方法更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Solutions of Exact and Approximate Methods for Traveling Salesman Problem
There are two major optimization methods: Exact and Approximate methods. A well known exact method, Branch and Bound algorithm (B&B) and approximate methods, Elimination-based Fruit Fly Optimization Algorithm (EFOA) and Artificial Atom Algorithm (A3) are used for solving the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP). For 56 destinations, the results of total distance, processing time, and the deviation between exact and approximate method will be compared where the distance between two destinations is a Euclidean distance and this study shows that the distance of B&B is 270 , EFOA is 270 and A3 is 288.38 which deviates 6.81%. For time processing aspect, B&B needs 12.5 days to process, EFOA needs 36.59 seconds, A3 needs 35.34 seconds. But for 29 destinations, exact method is more powerful than approximate method.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Revista Digital Lampsakos
Revista Digital Lampsakos ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信