This thesis considers the Two-Stage Vehicle Routing Problem (VRP) with Profits and Buffers, which generalizes various optimization problems that are relevant for practical applications, such as the Two-Machine Flow Shop with Buffers and the Orienteering Problem. Two optimization problems are considered for the Two-Stage VRP with Profits and Buffers, namely the minimization of total time while respecting a profit constraint and the maximization of total profit under a budget constraint. The former generalizes the makespan minimization problem for the Two-Machine Flow Shop with Buffers, whereas the latter is comparable to the problem of maximizing score in the Orienteering Problem. For the three problems, a theoretical analysis is performed regarding computational complexity, existence of optimal permutation schedules (where all vehicles traverse the same nodes in the same order) and potential gaps in attainable solution quality between permutation schedules and non-permutation schedules. The obtained theoretical results are visualized in a table that gives an overview of various subproblems belonging to the Two-Stage VRP with Profits and Buffers, their theoretical properties and how they are connected. For the Two-Machine Flow Shop with Buffers and the Orienteering Problem, two metaheuristics 2BF-ILS and VNSOP are presented that obtain favorable results in computational experiments when compared to other state-of-the-art algorithms. For the Two-Stage VRP with Profits and Buffers, an algorithmic framework for Iterative Search Algorithms with Variable Neighborhoods (ISAVaN) is proposed that generalizes aspects from 2BF-ILS as well as VNSOP. Various algorithms derived from that framework are evaluated in an experimental study. The evaluation methodology used for all computational experiments in this thesis takes the performance during the run time into account and demonstrates that algorithms for structurally different problems, which are encompassed by the Two-Stage VRP with Profits and Buffers, can be evaluated with similar methods. The results show that the most suitable choice for the components in these algorithms is dependent on the properties of the problem and the considered evaluation criteria. However, a number of similarities to algorithms that perform well for the Two-Machine Flow Shop with Buffers and the Orienteering Problem can be identified. The framework unifies these characteristics, providing a spectrum of algorithms that can be adapted to the specifics of the considered Vehicle Routing Problem.:1 Introduction 2 Background 2.1 Problem Motivation 2.2 Formal Definition of the Two-Stage VRP with Profits and Buffers 2.3 Review of Literature on Related Vehicle Routing Problems 2.3.1 Two-Stage Vehicle Routing Problems 2.3.2 Vehicle Routing Problems with Profits 2.3.3 Vehicle Routing Problems with Capacity- or Resource-based Restrictions 2.4 Preliminary Remarks on Subsequent Chapters 3 The Two-Machine Flow Shop Problem with Buffers 3.1 Review of Literature on Flow Shop Problems with Buffers 3.1.1 Algorithms and Metaheuristics for Flow Shops with Buffers 3.1.2 Two-Machine Flow Shop Problems with Buffers 3.1.3 Blocking Flow Shops 3.1.4 Non-Permutation Schedules 3.1.5 Other Extensions and Variations of Flow Shop Problems 3.2 Theoretical Properties 3.2.1 Computational Complexity 3.2.2 The Existence of Optimal Permutation Schedules 3.2.3 The Gap Between Permutation Schedules an Non-Permutation 3.3 A Modification of the NEH Heuristic 3.4 An Iterated Local Search for the Two-Machine Flow Shop Problem with Buffers 3.5 Computational Evaluation 3.5.1 Algorithms for Comparison 3.5.2 Generation of Problem Instances 3.5.3 Parameter Values 3.5.4 Comparison of 2BF-ILS with other Metaheuristics 3.5.5 Comparison of 2BF-OPT with NEH 3.6 Summary 4 The Orienteering Problem 4.1 Review of Literature on Orienteering Problems 4.2 Theoretical Properties 4.3 A Variable Neighborhood Search for the Orienteering Problem 4.4 Computational Evaluation 4.4.1 Measurement of Algorithm Performance 4.4.2 Choice of Algorithms for Comparison 4.4.3 Problem Instances 4.4.4 Parameter Values 4.4.5 Experimental Setup 4.4.6 Comparison of VNSOP with other Metaheuristics 4.5 Summary 5 The Two-Stage Vehicle Routing Problem with Profits and Buffers 5.1 Theoretical Properties of the Two-Stage VRP with Profits and Buffers 5.1.1 Computational Complexity of the General Problem 5.1.2 Existence of Permutation Schedules in the Set of Optimal Solutions 5.1.3 The Gap Between Permutation Schedules an Non-Permutation Schedules 5.1.4 Remarks on Restricted Cases 5.1.5 Overview of Theoretical Results 5.2 A Metaheuristic Framework for the Two-Stage VRP with Profits and Buffers 5.3 Experimental Results 5.3.1 Problem Instances 5.3.2 Experimental Results for O_{max R, Cmax≤B} 5.3.3 Experimental Results for O_{min Cmax, R≥Q} 5.4 Summary Bibliography List of Figures List of Tables List of Algorithms

The University Course Timetabling Problem (UCTP) is the problem of assigning locations (lecture halls, computer rooms) and time slots (time and date) to a set of events (lectures, labs) while satisfying a number of constraints such as avoiding double-bookings. Many variants of problem formulations exist, and most realistic variants are thought to be NP-hard. A recent trend in solving hard scheduling problems lies in the application of hybrid metaheuristics, where improvements are often found by hybridizing a population-based approach with some form of local search. In this paper, an implementation of a Genetic Algorithm (GA) that solves the UCTP is hybridized with local search in the form of Tabu Search (TS). The results show significant improvements to the performance and scalability over the non-hybridized GA. Two application strategies for the TS are investigated. The first strategy performs a switch-over from the GA to the TS, while the second interleaves the two algorithms. The effectiveness of each application strategy is seen to depend on the characteristics of the individual algorithms. / Schemaläggningsproblemet UCTP (University Course Timetabling Problem) består av problemet att tilldela platser (föreläsningssalar, laborationssalar) och tidpunkter (datum och klockslag) till en mängd tillställningar (föreläsningar, laborationer) under kravet att upprätthålla en mängd restriktioner, exempelvis att undvika dubbelbokningar. Det finns många varianter av problemformuleringen och de flesta realistiska formuleringer anses ge upphov till NP-svåra optimeringsproblem. En förhållandevis ny trend för lösningsmodeller till svåra schemaläggningsproblem ligger i tillämpningen av hybrida metaheuristiker, där förbättringar ofta ses när populationsbaserade algoritmer kombineras med någon typ av lokalsökning. I denna rapport undersöks en UCTP-lösning baserad på en Genetisk Algoritm (GA) som hybridiseratsmed en lokalsökning i form av en Tabusökning (TS). Resultaten visar på signifikanta förbättringar i prestanda och skalbarhet jämfört med den icke-hybridiserade GA:n. Två appliceringsstrategier för TS undersöks. Den första strategin utgörs av att byta algoritm från GA till TS, medan den andra utgörs av att sammanfläta de två algoritmerna. Appliceringsstrategiernas effektivitet ses bero av de individuella algoritmernas egenskaper.

In the building automation domain, there are gaps among various tasks related to design engineering. As a result created system designs must be adapted to the given requirements on system functionality, which is related to increased costs and engineering effort than planned. For this reason standards are prepared to enable a coordination among these tasks by providing guidelines and unified artifacts for the design. Moreover, a huge variety of prefabricated devices offered from different manufacturers on the market for building automation that realize building automation functions by preprogrammed software components. Current methods for design creation do not consider this variety and design solution is limited to product lines of a few manufacturers and expertise of system integrators. Correspondingly, this results in design solutions of a limited quality. Thus, a great optimization potential of the quality of design solutions and coordination of tasks related to design engineering arises. For given design requirements, the existence of a high number of devices that realize required functions leads to a combinatorial explosion of design alternatives at different price and quality levels. Finding optimal design alternatives is a hard problem to which a new solution method is proposed based on heuristical approaches. By integrating problem specific knowledge into algorithms based on heuristics, a promisingly high optimization performance is achieved. Further, optimization algorithms are conceived to consider a set of flexibly defined quality criteria specified by users and achieve system design solutions of high quality. In order to realize this idea, optimization algorithms are proposed in this thesis based on goal-oriented operations that achieve a balanced convergence and exploration behavior for a search in the design space applied in different strategies. Further, a component model is proposed that enables a seamless integration of design engineering tasks according to the related standards and application of optimization algorithms.

In the building automation domain, there are gaps among various tasks related to design engineering. As a result created system designs must be adapted to the given requirements on system functionality, which is related to increased costs and engineering effort than planned. For this reason standards are prepared to enable a coordination among these tasks by providing guidelines and unified artifacts for the design. Moreover, a huge variety of prefabricated devices offered from different manufacturers on the market for building automation that realize building automation functions by preprogrammed software components. Current methods for design creation do not consider this variety and design solution is limited to product lines of a few manufacturers and expertise of system integrators. Correspondingly, this results in design solutions of a limited quality. Thus, a great optimization potential of the quality of design solutions and coordination of tasks related to design engineering arises. For given design requirements, the existence of a high number of devices that realize required functions leads to a combinatorial explosion of design alternatives at different price and quality levels. Finding optimal design alternatives is a hard problem to which a new solution method is proposed based on heuristical approaches. By integrating problem specific knowledge into algorithms based on heuristics, a promisingly high optimization performance is achieved. Further, optimization algorithms are conceived to consider a set of flexibly defined quality criteria specified by users and achieve system design solutions of high quality. In order to realize this idea, optimization algorithms are proposed in this thesis based on goal-oriented operations that achieve a balanced convergence and exploration behavior for a search in the design space applied in different strategies. Further, a component model is proposed that enables a seamless integration of design engineering tasks according to the related standards and application of optimization algorithms.:1 Introduction 17 1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 1.2 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 1.3 Goals and Use of the Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 1.4 Solution Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 1.5 Organization of the Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2 Design Creation for Building Automation Systems 25 2.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.2 Engineering of Building Automation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.3 Network Protocols of Building Automation Systems . . . . . . . 33 2.4 Existing Solutions for Design Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 2.5 The Device Interoperability Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.6 Guidelines for Planning of Room Automation Systems . . . . . . 38 2.7 Quality Requirements on BAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.8 Quality Requirements on Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 2.8.1 Quality Requirements Related to Project Planning . . . . 42 2.8.2 Quality Requirements Related to Project Implementation 43 2.9 Quality Requirements on Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2.10 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 3 The Design Creation Task 47 3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3.2 System Design Composition Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.2.1 Abstract and Detailed Design Model . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.2.2 Mapping Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 3.3 Formulation of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 3.3.1 Problem properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3.3.2 Requirements on Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 4 Solution Methods for Design Generation and Optimization 59 4.1 Combinatorial Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 4.2 Metaheuristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 4.3 Examples for Metaheuristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4.3.1 Simulated Annealing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4.3.2 Tabu Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 4.3.3 Ant Colony Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 4.3.4 Evolutionary Computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 4.4 Choice of the Solver Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 4.5 Specialized Methods for Diversity Preservation . . . . . . . . . . 70 4.6 Approaches for Real World Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 4.6.1 Component-Based Mapping Problems . . . . . . . . . . . 71 4.6.2 Network Design Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 4.6.3 Comparison of Solution Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 4.7 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 5 Automated Creation of Optimized Designs 79 5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 5.2 Design Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 5.3 Component Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 5.3.1 Presumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 5.3.2 Integration of Component Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 5.4 Design Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 5.4.1 Component Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 5.4.2 Generation Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 5.5 Design Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 5.5.1 Problems and Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 5.5.2 Variations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 5.5.3 Application Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 5.6 Realization of the Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 5.6.1 Objective Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 5.6.2 Individual Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 5.7 Automated Design Creation For A Building . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 5.7.1 Room Spanning Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 5.7.2 Flexible Rooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 5.7.3 Technology Spanning Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 5.7.4 Preferences for Mapping of Function Blocks to Devices . . 132 5.8 Further Uses and Applicability of the Approach . . . . . . . . . . 133 5.9 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 6 Validation and Performance Analysis 137 6.1 Validation Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 6.2 Performance Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 6.3 Example Abstract Designs and Performance Tests . . . . . . . . 139 6.3.1 Criteria for Choosing Example Abstract Designs . . . . . 139 6.3.2 Example Abstract Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 6.3.3 Performance Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 6.3.4 Population Size P - Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 6.3.5 Cross-Over Probability pC - Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . 157 6.3.6 Mutation Probability pM - Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 6.3.7 Discussion for Optimization Results and Example Designs 168 6.3.8 Resource Consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 6.3.9 Parallelism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 6.4 Optimization Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 6.5 Framework Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 6.5.1 Components and Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 6.5.2 Workflow Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 6.5.3 Optimization Control By Graphical User Interface . . . . 180 6.6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 7 Conclusions 185 A Appendix of Designs 189 Bibliography 201 Index 211