INTEGER PROGRAMMING:SELECTED REFERENCES

By -

SELECTED REFERENCES

1. Achterberg, A.: “SCIP: Solving Constraint Integer Programs,” Mathematical Programming Computation, 1(1): 1-41, July 2009.

2. Appa, G., L. Pitsoulis, and H. P. Williams (eds.): Handbook on Modelling for Discrete Opti- mization, Springer, New York, 2006.

3. Baptiste, P., C. LePape, and W. Nuijten: Constraint-Based Scheduling: Applying Constraint Pro- gramming to Scheduling Problems, Kluwer Academic Publishers (now Springer), Boston, 2001.

4. Hillier, F. S., and M. S. Hillier: Introduction to Management Science: A Modeling and Case Studies Approach with Spreadsheets, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Burr Ridge, IL, 2014, chap. 7.

5. Hooker, J. N.: Integrated Methods for Optimization, 2nd ed., Springer, New York, 2012.

6. Karlof, J. K.: Integer Programming: Theory and Practice, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2006.

7. Li, D., and X. Sun: Nonlinear Integer Programming, Springer, New York, 2006. (A 2nd edition currently is being prepared with publication scheduled in 2015.)

8. Lustig, I., and J.-F. Puget: “Program Does Not Equal Program: Constraint Programming and Its Relationship to Mathematical Programming,” Interfaces, 31(6): 29–53, November–December 2001.

9. Nemhauser, G. L., and L. A. Wolsey: Integer and Combinatorial Optimization, Wiley, Hobo- ken, NJ, 1988, reprinted in 1999.

10. Schriver, A.: Theory of Linear and Integer Programming, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 1986, reprinted in paperback in 1998.

11. Williams, H. P.: Logic and Integer Programming, Springer, New York, 2009.

12. Williams, H. P.: Model Building in Mathematical Programming, 5th ed., Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2013.

Some Award-Winning Applications of Integer Programming:

(A link to all these articles is provided on our website, www.mhhe.com/hillier.)

A1. Armacost, A. P., C. Barnhart, K. A. Ware, and A. M. Wilson: “UPS Optimizes Its Air Net- work,” Interfaces, 34(1): 15–25, January–February 2004.

A2. Bertsimas, D., C. Darnell, and R. Soucy: “Portfolio Construction Through Mixed-Integer Programming at Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo and Company,” Interfaces, 29(1): 49–66, January–February 1999.

A3. Denton, B. T., J. Forrest, and R. J. Milne: “IBM Solves a Mixed-Integer Program to Optimize Its Semiconductor Supply Chain,” Interfaces, 36(5): 386–399, September–October 2006.

A4. Eveborn, P., M. Ronnqvist, H. Einarsdottir, M. Eklund, K. Liden, and M. Almroth: “Opera- tions Research Improves Quality and Efficiency in Home Care,” Interfaces, 39(1):18–34, January–February 2009.

A5. Everett, G., A. Philpott, K. Vatn, and R. Gjessing: “Norske Skog Improves Global Profitabil- ity Using Operations Research,” Interfaces, 40(1): 58–70, January–February 2010.

A6. Gryffenberg, I, et al.: “Guns or Butter: Decision Support for Determining the Size and Shape of the South African National Defense Force,” Interfaces, 27(1): 7–28, January–February 1997.

A7. Menezes, F., et al.: “Optimizing Helicopter Transport of Oil Rig Crews at Petrobras,

Interfaces, 40(5), 408–416, September–October 2010.

A8. Metty, T., et al.: “Reinventing the Supplier Negotiation Process at Motorola,” Interfaces, 35(1), 7–23, January–February 2005.

A9. Smith, B. C., R. Darrow, J. Elieson, D. Guenther, B. V. Rao, and F. Zouaoui: “Travelocity Becomes a Travel Retailer,” Interfaces, 37(1): 68–81, January–February 2007.

A10. Spencer III, T., A. J. Brigandi, D. R. Dargon, and M. J. Sheehan: “AT&T’s Telemarketing Site Selection System Offers Customer Support,” Interfaces, 20(1): 83–96, January–February 1990.

A11. Subramanian, R., R. P. Scheff, Jr., J. D. Quillinan, D. S. Wiper, and R. E. Marsten: “Coldstart: Fleet Assignment at Delta Air Lines,” Interfaces, 24(1): 104–120, January–February 1994.

A12. Yu, G., M. Argüello, G. Song, S. M. McCowan, and A. White: “A New Era for Crew Recovery at Continental Airlines,” Interfaces, 33(1): 5–22, January–February 2003.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NETWORK OPTIMIZATION MODELS:THE MINIMUM SPANNING TREE PROBLEM

By -
Image
THE MINIMUM SPANNING TREE PROBLEM The minimum spanning tree problem bears some similarities to the main version of the shortest-path problem presented in the preceding section. In both cases, an undi r ecte d and connected network is being considered, where the given information includes some mea- sure of the positive length (distance, cost, time, etc.) associated with each link. Both problems also involve choosing a set of links that have the shortest total length among all sets of links that satisfy a certain property. For the shortest-path problem, this property is that the chosen links must provide a path between the origin and the destination. For the minimum spanning tree problem, the required property is that the chosen links must provide a path between ea c h pair of nodes. The minimum spanning tree problem can be summarized as follows: 1. You are given the nodes of a network but not the links. Instead, you are given the po- tential links and the positive length for each
Read more

DUALITY THEORY:THE ESSENCE OF DUALITY THEORY

By -
Image
THE ESSENCE OF DUALITY THEORY Given our standard form for the primal problem at the left (perhaps after conversion from another form), its dual problem has the form shown to the right. Thus, with the primal problem in maximizatio n form, the dual problem is in minimization form instead. Furthermore, the dual problem uses exactly the same pa r amete r s as the primal problem, but in different locations, as summarized below. 1. The coefficients in the objective function of the primal problem are the right-hand sides of the functional constraints in the dual problem. 2. The right-hand sides of the functional constraints in the primal problem are the coef- ficients in the objective function of the dual problem. 3. The coefficients of a variable in the functional constraints of the primal problem are the coefficients in a functional constraint of the dual problem. To highlight the comparison, now look at these same two problems in matrix notation (as introduced at the beginn
Read more

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS:DIALOG GENERATION AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

By -
Image
DIALOG GENERATION AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS In our efforts in this chapter, we envision a basic DSS structure of the form shown in Figure 12. This figure also shows many of the operational functions of the database management system (DBMS) and the model base management system (MBMS). The primary purpose of the dialog generation and management system (DGMS) is to enhance the propensity and ability of the system user to use and benefit from the DSS. There are doubtless few users of a DSS who use it because of necessity. Most uses of a DSS are optional, and the decision maker must have some motivation and desire to use a DSS or it will likely remain unused. DSS use can occur in a variety of ways. In all uses of a DGMS, it is the DGMS that the user interacts with. In an early seminal text, Bennett (1983) posed three questions to indicate this centrality: 1. What presentations is the user able to see at the DSS display terminal? 2. What must the user know about what is seen at the display
Read more