Selection and Penalty Strategies for Genetic Algorithms Designed to Solve Spatial Forest Planning Problems

Genetic algorithms (GAs) have demonstrated success in solving spatial forest planning problems. We present an adaptive GA that incorporates population-level statistics to dynamically update penalty functions, a process analogous to strategic oscillation from the tabu search literature. We also explore performance of various selection strategies. The GA identified feasible solutions within 96%, 98%, and 93% of a nonspatial relaxed upper bound calculated for landscapes of 100, 500, and 1000 units, respectively. The problem solved includes forest structure constraints limiting harvest opening sizes and requiring minimally sized patches of mature forest. Results suggest that the dynamic penalty strategy is superior to the more standard static penalty implementation. Results also suggest that tournament selection can be superior to the more standard implementation of proportional selection for smaller problems, but becomes susceptible to premature convergence as problem size increases. It is therefore important to balance selection pressure with appropriate disruption. We conclude that integrating intelligent search strategies into the context of genetic algorithms can yield improvements and should be investigated for future use in spatial planning with ecological goals.

[1]  Kevin Boston,et al.  An economic and landscape evaluation of the green-up rules for California, Oregon, and Washington (USA) , 2006 .

[2]  Bernard De Baets,et al.  Single versus multiple objective genetic algorithms for solving the even-flow forest management problem , 2004 .

[3]  Pete Bettinger,et al.  The Key Literature of, and Trends in, Forest-Level Management Planning in North America, 1950–2001 , 2004 .

[4]  M. Palahi,et al.  Examinando variables de paisaje alternativas para una planificación forestal ecológica: caso de estudio para el urogallo en Cataluña , 2004 .

[5]  John Sessions,et al.  A review of the status and use of validation procedures for heuristics used in forest planning , 2009, Math. Comput. For. Nat. Resour. Sci..

[6]  David B. Fogel,et al.  Evolution-ary Computation 1: Basic Algorithms and Operators , 2000 .

[7]  Pete Bettinger,et al.  Estimating the effects of adjacency and green-up constraints on landowners of different sizes and spatial arrangements located in the southeastern U.S. , 2008 .

[8]  Karin Öhman,et al.  Creating continuous areas of old forest in long- term forest planning , 2000 .

[9]  Alan T. Murray,et al.  Review of combinatorial problems induced by spatial forest harvesting planning , 2006, Discret. Appl. Math..

[10]  Bernard De Baets,et al.  A spatial approach to forest‐management optimization: linking GIS and multiple objective genetic algorithms , 2006, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[11]  C. Lockwood,et al.  Harvest scheduling with spatial constraints: a simulated annealing approach , 1993 .

[12]  José G. Borges,et al.  Designing an evolution program for solving integer forest management scheduling models : An application in Portugal , 2001 .

[13]  Ilan Vertinsky,et al.  Forest planning using co-evolutionary cellular automata , 2007 .

[14]  Richard C. Stedman,et al.  Sense of place and forest science: Toward a program of quantitative research : Sense of place , 2003 .

[15]  Paul W. Fieguth,et al.  Forest structure optimization using evolutionary programming and landscape ecology metrics , 2005, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[16]  David B. Fogel,et al.  CONTINUOUS EVOLUTIONARY PROGRAMMING: ANALYSIS AND EXPERIMENTS , 1995 .

[17]  Dan Boneh,et al.  On genetic algorithms , 1995, COLT '95.

[18]  Miguel Constantino,et al.  A column generation approach for solving a non-temporal forest harvest model with spatial structure constraints , 2005, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[19]  Guoliang Liu,et al.  Optimisation algorithms for spatially constrained forest planning , 2006 .

[20]  Shane Legg,et al.  Tournament versus fitness uniform selection , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE Cat. No.04TH8753).

[21]  Andrzej Osyczka,et al.  Evolutionary Algorithms for Single and Multicriteria Design Optimization , 2001 .

[22]  Ljusk Ola Eriksson,et al.  Formation of harvest units with genetic algorithms. , 2000 .

[23]  J. Borges,et al.  Combining random and systematic search heuristic procedures for solving spatially constrained forest management scheduling models , 2002 .

[24]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  Harvest Scheduling with Area-Based Adjacency Constraints , 2002, Forest Science.

[25]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A Comparative Analysis of Selection Schemes Used in Genetic Algorithms , 1990, FOGA.

[26]  John Sessions,et al.  Intensifying a heuristic forest harvest scheduling search procedure with 2-opt decision choices , 1999 .

[27]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  Finding the Efficient Frontier of a Bi-Criteria, Spatially Explicit, Harvest Scheduling Problem , 2006, Forest Science.

[28]  J. Sessions,et al.  Development of a Spatial Harvest Scheduling System to Promote the Conservation between Indigenous and Exotic Forests , 2006 .

[29]  Fred Glover,et al.  Tabu Search: A Tutorial , 1990 .

[30]  Juan Pablo Vielma,et al.  Improving computational capabilities for addressing volume constraints in forest harvest scheduling problems , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[31]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  Promoting Large, Compact Mature Forest Patches in Harvest Scheduling Models , 2008 .

[32]  Alan T. Murray.  Spatial restrictions in harvest scheduling , 1999 .

[33]  C. Reeves.  Modern heuristic techniques for combinatorial problems , 1993 .

[34]  Francisco Barahona,et al.  Harvest Scheduling Subject to Maximum Area Restrictions: Exploring Exact Approaches , 2005, Oper. Res..

[35]  Kevin Boston,et al.  The economic impact of green-up constraints in the southeastern United States , 2001 .

[36]  L. S. Davis.  Forest Management: To Sustain Ecological, Economic, and Social Values , 2005 .

[37]  David A. Hughell,et al.  SIMULATED ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT FOR TIMBER AND WILDLIFE UNDER UNCERTAINTY , 1996 .

[38]  Daniel Granot,et al.  A tabu search algorithm for finding good forest harvest schedules satisfying green-up constraints , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[39]  T. M. Barrett,et al.  Even-aged restrictions with sub-graph adjacency , 2000, Ann. Oper. Res..

[40]  Kevin Boston,et al.  An analysis of Monte Carlo integer programming, simulated annealing, and tabu search heuristics for solving spatial harvest scheduling problems. , 1999 .

[41]  Alan T. Murray,et al.  Incorporating average and maximum area restrictions in harvest scheduling models , 2004 .

[42]  Gilbert Laporte,et al.  A Tabu Search Heuristic for the Vehicle Routing Problem , 1991 .

[43]  Jeff D. Hamann,et al.  Optimizing the primary forest products supply chain : a multi-objective heuristic approach , 2008 .

[44]  Mikko Kurttila,et al.  Examining the performance of six heuristic optimisation techniques in different forest planning problems , 2005 .

[45]  Alan T. Murray,et al.  Analyzing Cliques for Imposing Adjacency Restrictions in Forest Models , 1996, Forest Science.

[46]  Kevin Boston,et al.  Combining tabu search and genetic algorithm heuristic techniques to solve spatial harvest scheduling problems , 2002 .

[47]  Eldon A. Gunn,et al.  Tabu search design for difficult forest management optimization problems , 2003 .

[48]  Felipe Caro,et al.  A 2-Opt Tabu Search Procedure for the Multiperiod Forest Harvesting Problem with Adjacency, Greenup, Old Growth, and Even Flow Constraints , 2003, Forest Science.

[49]  John Sessions,et al.  Linking multiple tools: an american case , 2006 .

[50]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  A mixed-integer formulation of the minimum patch size problem , 2003 .

[51]  E. Gunn,et al.  A model and Tabu search method to optimize stand harvest and road construction schedules , 2000 .

[52]  Atsuyuki Okabe,et al.  Spatial Tessellations: Concepts and Applications of Voronoi Diagrams , 1992, Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics.

[53]  H. M. Rauscher,et al.  Prescriptive Treatment Optimization Using a Genetic Algorithm: A Tool for Forest Management , 2006 .

[54]  Zbigniew Michalewicz,et al.  Evolutionary Computation 1 , 2018 .

[55]  Roberto Battiti,et al.  The Reactive Tabu Search , 1994, INFORMS J. Comput..

[56]  T. Pukkala,et al.  Examining alternative landscape metrics in ecological forest planning : a case for capercaillie in Catalonia , 2004 .

[57]  John Sessions,et al.  Eight heuristic planning techniques applied to three increasingly difficult wildlife planning problems , 2002 .

[58]  Alain Hertz,et al.  Guidelines for the use of meta-heuristics in combinatorial optimization , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[59]  Kevin Crowe,et al.  An indirect search algorithm for harvest-scheduling under adjacency constraints , 2003 .

[60]  Felipe Caro,et al.  EVALUATING THE ECONOMIC COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES IN PLANTATION HARVESTING THROUGH THE USE OF MATHEMATICAL MODELS , 2009 .

[61]  Timo Pukkala,et al.  A comparison of one- and two-compartment neighbourhoods in heuristic search with spatial forest management goals , 2004 .

[62]  David H. Wolpert,et al.  No free lunch theorems for optimization , 1997, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[63]  José G. Borges,et al.  Using dynamic programming and overlapping subproblems to address adjacency in large harvest scheduling problems , 1998 .

[64]  Kevin A. Crowe,et al.  An evaluation of the simulated annealing algorithm for solving the area-restricted harvest-scheduling model against optimal benchmarks , 2005 .

[65]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .