I'm currently working on a large scale timetabling problem from my university. I'm using CPLEX to create the model and solve it, but due to it's size and processing time, I'm considering trying out a local search algorithm like G.A to solve it, but I'm lost on how to properly do it. Is there a way of applying a local search on it without having to reformulate the whole model?
one possible manner to tackle your problem is to use the CPLEX callbacks.
You may implement a heuristic callback. In this callback, you can implement your GA within the CPLEX model and use it to find a feasible solution (which I think is very difficult in various timetabling problems) or to improve your current solution.
Related
I have to optimize the result of a process that depends on a large number of variables, i.e. a laser engraving system where the engraving depth depends on the laser speed, distance, power and so on.
The final objective is the minimization of the engraving time, or the maximization of the laser speed. All the other parameters can vary, but must stay within safe bounds.
I have never used any machine learning tools, but to my very limited knowledge this seems like a good use case for TensorFlow or any other machine learning library.
I would experimentally gather data points to train the algorithm, test it and then use a gradient descent optimizer to find the parameters (within bounds) that maximize the laser travel velocity.
Does this sound feasible? How would you approach such a problem? Can you link to any examples available online?
Thank you,
Riccardo
I’m not quite sure if I understood the problem correctly, would you add some example data and a desired output?
As far as I understood, It could be feasible to use TensorFlow, but I believe there are better solutions to that problem. Let me expand on this.
TensorFlow is a framework focused in the development of Deep Learning models. These usually require lots of data (the number really depends on the problem) but I don’t believe that just you manually gathering this data would be enough unless your team is quite big or already have some data gathered.
Also, as you have a minimization (or maximization) problem given variables that lay within a known range, I think this can be a case of Operations Research optimization instead of Machine Learning. Check this example of OR.
This year Google produced 5 different packages for seq2seq:
seq2seq (claimed to be general purpose but
inactive)
nmt (active but supposed to be just
about NMT probably)
legacy_seq2seq
(clearly legacy)
contrib/seq2seq
(not complete probably)
tensor2tensor (similar purpose, also
active development)
Which package is actually worth to use for the implementation? It seems they are all different approaches but none of them stable enough.
I've had too a headache about some issue, which framework to choose? I want to implement OCR using Encoder-Decoder with attention. I've been trying to implement it using legacy_seq2seq (it was main library that time), but it was hard to understand all that process, for sure it should not be used any more.
https://github.com/google/seq2seq: for me it looks like trying to making a command line training script with not writing own code. If you want to learn Translation model, this should work but in other case it may not (like for my OCR), because there is not enough of documentation and too little number of users
https://github.com/tensorflow/tensor2tensor: this is very similar to above implementation but it is maintained and you can add more of own code for ex. reading own dataset. The basic usage is again Translation. But it also enable such task like Image Caption, which is nice. So if you want to try ready to use library and your problem is txt->txt or image->txt then you could try this. It should also work for OCR. I'm just not sure it there is enough documentation for each case (like using CNN at feature extractor)
https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/tree/master/tensorflow/contrib/seq2seq: apart from above, this is just pure library, which can be useful when you want to create a seq2seq by yourself using TF. It have a function to add Attention, Sequence Loss etc. In my case I chose that option as then I have much more freedom of choosing the each step of framework. I can choose CNN architecture, RNN cell type, Bi or Uni RNN, type of decoder etc. But then you will need to spend some time to get familiar with all the idea behind it.
https://github.com/tensorflow/nmt : another translation framework, based on tf.contrib.seq2seq library
From my perspective you have two option:
If you want to check the idea very fast and be sure that you are using very efficient code, use tensor2tensor library. It should help you to get early results or even very good final model.
If you want to make a research, not being sure how exactly the pipeline should look like or want to learn about idea of seq2seq, use library from tf.contrib.seq2seq.
As far as i know Gurobi resumes optimizing where it left after calling Model.Terminate() and then calling Model.Optimize() again. So I can terminate and get the best solution so far and then proceed.Now I want to do the same, but since I want to use parts of the suboptimal solution I need to set some variables to fixed values before I call Model.Optimize() again and optimize the rest of the model. How can i do this so that gurobi does not start all over again?
First, it sounds like you're describing a mixed-integer program (MIP); model modification is different for continuous optimization (linear programming, quadratic programming).
When you modify a MIP model, the tree information is no longer helpful. Instead, you must resolve the continuous (LP) relaxation and create a new branch-and-cut tree. However, the prior solution may still be used as a MIP start, which can reduce the solve time for the second model.
However, your method may be redundant with the RINS algorithm, which is an automatic feature of Gurobi MIP. You can control the behavior of RINS via the parameters RINS, SubMIPNodes and Heuristics.
We are currently trying to improve the performance of a planning problem we've implemented in OptaPlanner. Our model has ~45,000 chained variables and after profiling the application it seems like the main bottleneck is around the cloning. Approximately 90% of the CPU run-time is consumed by the FieldAccessingSolutionCloner method calls.
We've already tried to make our object model more lightweight by reducing the number of Maps and Sets within the PlanningEntities, changing fields to primitives where possible, but from your own OptaPlanner experience have you any advice about how speed up cloning performance?
Have you tried writing a custom cloner? See docs.
The default one needs to rely on reflection, so it's slower.
Also, the structure of your domain model influences how much you need to clone (regardless if you go custom or not):
If you delete your Solution and Planning Entities classes, do your other domain classes still compile?
If yes, then the clone is minimal. If no, it's not.
Can anyone give me some tips to make a binary integer programming model faster?
I currently have a model that runs well with very small amount of variables but as soon as I increase the number of variables in my model SCIP keeps running without giving me an optimal solution. I'm currently using SCIP with Soplex to find an optimal solution.
You should have a look at the statistics (type display statistics in the interactive shell). Watch out for time consuming heuristics that don't find a solution and try disabling them. You should also play around with the parameters to find better suited settings for your instances (different branching rule or node selection). Without further information, though, we won't be able to help you.