A solution robustness approach applied to network optimization problems

Solution robustness focuses on structural similarities between the nominal solution and the scenario solutions. Most other robust optimization approaches focus on the quality robustness and only evaluate the relevance of their solutions through the objective function value. However, it can be more important to optimize the solution robustness and, once the uncertainty is revealed, find an alternative scenario solution x which is as similar as possible to the nominal solution x. This for example occurs when the robust solution is implemented on a regular basis or when the uncertainty is revealed late. We call this distance between x and x the solution cost. We consider the proactive problem which minimizes the average solution cost over a discrete set of scenarios while ensuring the optimality of the nominal objective of x. We show for two different solution distances dval and dstruct that the proactive problem is NP-hard for both the integer min-cost flow problem with uncertain arc demands and for the integer max-flow problem with uncertain arc capacities. For these two problems, we prove that once the uncertainty is revealed, even identifying a reactive solution x with a minimal distance to a given solution x is NP-hard for dstruct, and that it is polynomial for dval. We highlight the benefits of solution robustness in a case study on a railroad planning problem. First, we compare our proactive approach to the anchored and the k-distance approaches. Then, we show the efficiency of the proactive solution over reactive solutions. Finally, we illustrate the solution cost reduction when relaxing the optimality constraint on the nominal objective of the proactive solution x.

[1]  Leo G. Kroon,et al.  A Branch-and-Cut Approach for Solving Railway Line-Planning Problems , 2004, Transp. Sci..

[2]  J.-P. Vial,et al.  A model for robust capacity planning for telecommunications networks under demand uncertainty , 2007, 2007 6th International Workshop on Design and Reliable Communication Networks.

[3]  Michael Poss,et al.  Affine recourse for the robust network design problem: Between static and dynamic routing , 2011, Networks.

[4]  A. Ben-Tal,et al.  Adjustable robust solutions of uncertain linear programs , 2004, Math. Program..

[5]  Roel Leus,et al.  The generation of stable project plans , 2004, 4OR.

[6]  Reha Uzsoy,et al.  Predictable scheduling of a single machine with breakdowns and sensitive jobs , 1999 .

[7]  Amit Kumar,et al.  Provisioning a virtual private network: a network design problem for multicommodity flow , 2001, STOC '01.

[8]  Arkadi Nemirovski,et al.  Robust Convex Optimization , 1998, Math. Oper. Res..

[9]  Willy Herroelen,et al.  The complexity of machine scheduling for stability with a single disrupted job , 2005, Oper. Res. Lett..

[10]  Allen L. Soyster,et al.  Technical Note - Convex Programming with Set-Inclusive Constraints and Applications to Inexact Linear Programming , 1973, Oper. Res..

[11]  Willy Herroelen,et al.  The construction of stable project baseline schedules , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[12]  Reha Uzsoy,et al.  Predictable scheduling of a job shop subject to breakdowns , 1998, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[13]  Christina Büsing Recoverable robust shortest path problems , 2012, Networks.

[14]  Erik Demeulemeester,et al.  The use of buffers in project management: The trade-off between stability and makespan , 2004 .

[15]  Rolf H. Möhring,et al.  The Concept of Recoverable Robustness, Linear Programming Recovery, and Railway Applications , 2009, Robust and Online Large-Scale Optimization.

[16]  Walid Ben-Ameur,et al.  NEW ECONOMICAL VIRTUAL PRIVATE NETWORKS , 2003 .

[17]  Kenneth Sörensen,et al.  A genetic algorithm for robust schedules in a one-machine environment with ready times and due dates , 2004, 4OR.

[18]  François Ramond,et al.  Reducing the Adaptation Costs of a Rolling Stock Schedule with Adaptive Solution: the Case of Demand Changes , 2019 .

[19]  P. Kreuzer,et al.  Optimal lines for railway systems , 1997 .

[20]  Philippe Chrétienne,et al.  The Anchor-Robust Project Scheduling Problem , 2019 .

[21]  Anita Schöbel,et al.  Recovery-to-optimality: A new two-stage approach to robustness with an application to aperiodic timetabling , 2014, Comput. Oper. Res..

[22]  Alper Atamtürk,et al.  Two-Stage Robust Network Flow and Design Under Demand Uncertainty , 2007, Oper. Res..

[23]  Melvyn Sim,et al.  The Price of Robustness , 2004, Oper. Res..

[24]  Matthew L. Ginsberg,et al.  Supermodels and Robustness , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.