Crude oil refinery scheduling: addressing a real-world multiobjective problem through genetic programming and dominance-based approaches

This study presents the crude oil scheduling problem with four objectives divided in two different levels of importance. It comes from a real refinery where the scheduling starts on the offloading of ships, encompasses terminal and refinery tanks, a crude pipeline, and finishes on the output streams of the crude distillation units. We propose a new approach for the Quantum-Inspired Grammar-based Linear Genetic Programming (QIGLGP) evolutionary algorithm to handle the multiple objectives of the problem using the non-dominance concept. The modifications are concentrated on the population updating and sorting steps of QIGLGP. We tackle difference of importance among the objectives using the principle of violation of constraints. The problem constraints define if an instruction will or not be executed but do not affect the violation equation of the objectives. The individuals which have objective values under a pre-defined upper limit are better ranked. Results from five scenarios showed that the proposed model was able to significantly increase the percentage of runs with acceptable solutions, achieving success ratio of 100% in 3 cases and over 70% in 2 other ones. They also show that the Pareto front of these accepted runs contains a set of non-dominated solutions that could be analyzed by the decision maker for his a posteriori decision.

[1]  J. Periaux,et al.  Evolutionary Methods for Design, Optimization and Control with Applications to Industrial Problems , 2001 .

[2]  Qingfu Zhang,et al.  MOEA/D: A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Decomposition , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[3]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[4]  Teresa Bernarda Ludermir,et al.  Many Objective Particle Swarm Optimization , 2016, Inf. Sci..

[5]  Kiyoshi Tanaka,et al.  Pareto partial dominance MOEA and hybrid archiving strategy included CDAS in many-objective optimization , 2010, IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[6]  Marianthi G. Ierapetritou,et al.  Lagrangian decomposition approach to scheduling large-scale refinery operations , 2015, Comput. Chem. Eng..

[7]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  SPEA2: Improving the strength pareto evolutionary algorithm , 2001 .

[8]  S. Hamacher,et al.  Genetic algorithms applied to scheduling and optimization of refinery operations , 2008 .

[9]  Sylvain Mouret,et al.  A new Lagrangian decomposition approach applied to the integration of refinery planning and crude-oil scheduling , 2011, Comput. Chem. Eng..

[10]  MengChu Zhou,et al.  Short-Term Schedulability Analysis of Multiple Distiller Crude Oil Operations in Refinery With Oil Residency Time Constraint , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[11]  C. A. Coello Coello,et al.  Evolutionary multi-objective optimization: a historical view of the field , 2006, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine.

[12]  J. M. Pinto,et al.  Mixed-Integer Programming Approach for Short-Term Crude Oil Scheduling , 2004 .

[13]  Shahryar Rahnamayan,et al.  EliteNSGA-III: An improved evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm , 2016, 2016 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[14]  C. Edward Bodington,et al.  Planning, Scheduling, and Control Integration in the Process Industries , 1995 .

[15]  Xiaodong Li,et al.  Integrating user preferences and decomposition methods for many-objective optimization , 2014, 2014 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[16]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Using Reference-Point Based Nondominated Sorting Approach, Part II: Handling Constraints and Extending to an Adaptive Approach , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[17]  Dipti Srinivasan,et al.  A Survey of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms Based on Decomposition , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[18]  Gang Chen,et al.  Many-objective genetic programming for job-shop scheduling , 2016, 2016 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[19]  R. K. Ursem Multi-objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms , 2009 .

[20]  Peter J. Fleming,et al.  On the Evolutionary Optimization of Many Conflicting Objectives , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[21]  Arie van Deursen,et al.  Domain-specific language design requires feature descriptions , 2002 .

[22]  Marco Aurélio Cavalcanti Pacheco,et al.  Toward a Quantum-Inspired Linear Genetic Programming model , 2009, 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[23]  Sujing Wang,et al.  Simultaneous scheduling of front-end crude transfer and refinery processing , 2017, Comput. Chem. Eng..

[24]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Using Reference-Point-Based Nondominated Sorting Approach, Part I: Solving Problems With Box Constraints , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[25]  Hiroyuki Sato,et al.  Pareto Partial Dominance MOEA in Many-Objective Optimization , 2009 .

[26]  Marco Aurélio Cavalcanti Pacheco,et al.  Quantum-Inspired Linear Genetic Programming as a Knowledge Management System , 2013, Comput. J..

[27]  Xin Yao,et al.  Many-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms , 2015, ACM Comput. Surv..