Modeling the Dynamics of Ant Colony Optimization

The dynamics of Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) algorithms is studied using a deterministic model that assumes an average expected behavior of the algorithms. The ACO optimization metaheuristic is an iterative approach, where in every iteration, artificial ants construct solutions randomly but guided by pheromone information stemming from former ants that found good solutions. The behavior of ACO algorithms and the ACO model are analyzed for certain types of permutation problems. It is shown analytically that the decisions of an ant are influenced in an intriguing way by the use of the pheromone information and the properties of the pheromone matrix. This explains why ACO algorithms can show a complex dynamic behavior even when there is only one ant per iteration and no competition occurs. The ACO model is used to describe the algorithm behavior as a combination of situations with different degrees of competition between the ants. This helps to better understand the dynamics of the algorithm when there are several ants per iteration as is always the case when using ACO algorithms for optimization. Simulations are done to compare the behavior of the ACO model with the ACO algorithm. Results show that the deterministic model describes essential features of the dynamics of ACO algorithms quite accurately, while other aspects of the algorithms behavior cannot be found in the model.

[1]  Kenneth Steiglitz,et al.  Combinatorial Optimization: Algorithms and Complexity , 1981 .

[2]  Walter J. Gutjahr,et al.  ACO algorithms with guaranteed convergence to the optimal solution , 2002, Inf. Process. Lett..

[3]  Martin Middendorf,et al.  Pheromone Modification Strategies for Ant Algorithms Applied to Dynamic TSP , 2001, EvoWorkshops.

[4]  I. Douglas Bruce,et al.  Evolution Determined by Trajectory of Expected Populations: Sufficient Conditions, with Application to Crossover , 1999, Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Prügel-Bennett,et al.  Analysis of genetic algorithms using statistical mechanics. , 1994, Physical review letters.

[6]  James P. Crutchfield,et al.  Statistical Dynamics of the Royal Road Genetic Algorithm , 1999, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[7]  Hartmut Schmeck,et al.  Ant colony optimization for resource-constrained project scheduling , 2000, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[8]  Daniel Merkle,et al.  A New Approach to Solve Permutation Scheduling Problems with Ant Colony Optimization , 2001, EvoWorkshops.

[9]  Marco Dorigo,et al.  The ant colony optimization meta-heuristic , 1999 .

[10]  Daniel Merkle,et al.  On the Behaviour of ACO Algorithms : Studies on Simple Problems , 2001 .

[11]  Walter J. Gutjahr,et al.  A Graph-based Ant System and its convergence , 2000, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[12]  Daniel Merkle,et al.  An Ant Algorithm with a New Pheromone Evaluation Rule for Total Tardiness Problems , 2000, EvoWorkshops.

[13]  Marco Dorigo,et al.  Optimization, Learning and Natural Algorithms , 1992 .

[14]  Tobias Teich,et al.  A new Ant Colony Algorithm for the Job Shop Scheduling Problem , 2001 .

[15]  Marco Dorigo,et al.  Ant system: optimization by a colony of cooperating agents , 1996, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part B.

[16]  Chandrasekharan Rajendran,et al.  Ant-colony algorithms for permutation flowshop scheduling to minimize makespan/total flowtime of jobs , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[17]  Gunar E. Liepins,et al.  Punctuated Equilibria in Genetic Search , 1991, Complex Syst..

[18]  Adam Prügel-Bennett,et al.  Modelling GA Dynamics: 1st , 2001 .

[19]  Michael D. Vose,et al.  The simple genetic algorithm - foundations and theory , 1999, Complex adaptive systems.

[20]  Thomas Stützle,et al.  A SHORT CONVERGENCE PROOF FOR A CLASS OF ACO ALGORITHMS , 2002 .