The goal of this paper is to critically review advances in the area of chemical production scheduling over the past three decades and then present two recently proposed solution methods that have led to dramatic computational enhancements. First, we present a general framework and problem classification and discuss modeling and solution methods with an emphasis on mixed-integer programming (MIP) techniques. Second, we present two solution methods: () a constraint propagation algorithm that allows us to compute parameters that are then used to tighten MIP scheduling models and () a reformulation that introduces new variables, thus leading to effective branching. We also present computational results and an example illustrating how these methods are implemented, as well as the resulting enhancements. We close with a discussion of open research challenges and future research directions.

[Erratum, Closure]

An erratum has been published for this article:
Advances in Mixed-Integer Programming Methods for Chemical Production Scheduling

Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Méndez CA, Cerda J, Grossmann IE, Harjunkoski I, Fahl M. 1.  2006. State-of-the-art review of optimization methods for short-term scheduling of batch processes. Comput. Chem. Eng. 30:913–46Provides a thorough review of short-term scheduling approaches, including several MIP models. [Google Scholar]
  2. Maravelias CT. 2.  2012. General framework and modeling approach classification for chemical production scheduling. AIChE J. 58:1812–28Presents a general framework for chemical production scheduling and a classification of problems and modeling approaches. [Google Scholar]
  3. Velez S, Sundaramoorthy A, Maravelias CT. 3.  2013. Valid inequalities based on demand propagation for chemical production scheduling MIP models. AIChE J. 59:872–87Presents the demand propagation algorithm for the generation of tightening constraints discussed in section on Tightening Methods. [Google Scholar]
  4. Velez S, Maravelias CT. 4.  2013. Reformulations and branching methods for mixed-integer programming chemical production scheduling models. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52:3832–41Addresses the reformulation of time-indexed models discussed in section on Reformulation. [Google Scholar]
  5. Stadtler H. 5.  2005. Supply chain management and advanced planning—basics, overview and challenges. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 163:575–88 [Google Scholar]
  6. Shapiro JF. 6.  2007. Modeling the Supply Chain Belmont, CA: Thomson-Brooks/Cole608
  7. Varma VA, Reklaitis GV, Blau GE, Pekny JF. 7.  2007. Enterprise-wide modeling & optimization—an overview of emerging research challenges and opportunities. Comput. Chem. Eng. 31:692–711 [Google Scholar]
  8. Grossmann I. 8.  2005. Enterprise-wide optimization: a new frontier in process systems engineering. AIChE J. 51:1846–57 [Google Scholar]
  9. Voudouris VT, Grossmann IE. 9.  1996. MILP model for scheduling and design of a special class of multipurpose batch plants. Comput. Chem. Eng. 20:1335–60 [Google Scholar]
  10. Kallrath J. 10.  2002. Planning and scheduling in the process industry. OR Spectr. 24:219–50 [Google Scholar]
  11. Maravelias CT, Sung C. 11.  2009. Integration of production planning and scheduling: overview, challenges and opportunities. Comput. Chem. Eng. 33:1919–30 [Google Scholar]
  12. Shobrys DE, White DC. 12.  2002. Planning, scheduling and control systems: why cannot they work together. Comput. Chem. Eng. 26:149–60 [Google Scholar]
  13. Harjunkoski I, Nystrom R, Horch A. 13.  2009. Integration of scheduling and control—Theory or practice?. Comput. Chem. Eng. 33:1909–18 [Google Scholar]
  14. Engell S, Harjunkoski I. 14.  2012. Optimal operation: scheduling, advanced control and their integration. Comput. Chem. Eng. 47:121–33 [Google Scholar]
  15. Pinedo M. 15.  2002. Scheduling: Theory, Algorithms, and Systems Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall586
  16. Carlier J, Pinson E. 16.  1989. An algorithm for solving the job-shop problem. Manag. Sci. 35:164–76 [Google Scholar]
  17. Adams J, Balas E, Zawack D. 17.  1988. The shifting bottleneck procedure for job shop scheduling. Manag. Sci. 34:391–401 [Google Scholar]
  18. Haupt R. 18.  1989. A survey of priority rule-based scheduling. OR Spectr. 11:3–16 [Google Scholar]
  19. Piana S, Engell S. 19.  2010. Hybrid evolutionary optimization of the operation of pipeless plants. J. Heuristics 16:311–36 [Google Scholar]
  20. Baptiste P, Le Pape C, Nuijten W. 20.  2001. Constraint-Based Scheduling: Applying Constraint Programming to Scheduling Problems Boston: Kluwer Acad198
  21. Van Hentenryck P, Michel L. 21.  2005. Constraint-Based Local Search Cambridge, MA: MIT Press422
  22. Panek S, Engell S, Subbiah S, Stursberg O. 22.  2008. Scheduling of multi-product batch plants based upon timed automata models. Comput. Chem. Eng. 32:275–91 [Google Scholar]
  23. Nemhauser GL, Wolsey LA. 23.  1988. Integer and Combinatorial Optimization New York: Wiley763
  24. Wolsey LA. 24.  1998. Integer Programming New York: Wiley264
  25. Hooker J. 25.  2000. Logic-Based Methods for Optimization: Combining Optimization and Constraint Satisfaction New York: John Wiley & Sons495
  26. Hooker JN. 26.  2002. Logic, optimization, and constraint programming. INFORMS J. Comput. 14:295–321 [Google Scholar]
  27. Sand G, Till J, Tometzki T, Urselmann M, Engell S, Emmerich M. 27.  2008. Engineered versus standard evolutionary algorithms: a case study in batch scheduling with recourse. Comput. Chem. Eng. 32:2706–22 [Google Scholar]
  28. Bixby R, Rothberg E. 28.  2007. Progress in computational mixed integer programming—a look back from the other side of the tipping point. Ann. Oper. Res. 149:37–41 [Google Scholar]
  29. Atamturk A, Savelsbergh MWP. 29.  2005. Integer-programming software systems. Ann. Oper. Res. 140:67–124 [Google Scholar]
  30. Johnson EL, Nemhauser GL, Savelsbergh MWP. 30.  2000. Progress in linear programming-based algorithms for integer programming: an exposition. INFORMS J. Comput. 12:2–23 [Google Scholar]
  31. Maravelias CT, Grossmann IE. 31.  2006. On the relation of continuous- and discrete-time state-task network formulations. AIChE J. 52:843–49 [Google Scholar]
  32. Ku HM, Karimi IA. 32.  1988. Scheduling in serial multiproduct batch processes with finite interstage storage—a mixed integer linear program formulation. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 27:1840–48 [Google Scholar]
  33. Pinto JM, Grossmann IE. 33.  1995. A continuous-time mixed-integer linear-programming model for short-term scheduling of multistage batch plants. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 34:3037–51 [Google Scholar]
  34. Cerda J, Henning GP, Grossmann IE. 34.  1997. A mixed-integer linear programming model for short-term scheduling of single-stage multiproduct batch plants with parallel lines. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 36:1695–707 [Google Scholar]
  35. Castro PM, Grossmann IE. 35.  2005. New continuous-time MILP model for the short-term scheduling of multistage batch plants. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44:9175–90 [Google Scholar]
  36. Liu Y, Karimi IA. 36.  2007. Novel continuous-time formulations for scheduling multi-stage batch plants with identical parallel units. Comput. Chem. Eng. 31:1671–93 [Google Scholar]
  37. Liu Y, Karimi IA. 37.  2007. Scheduling multistage, multiproduct batch plants with nonidentical parallel units and unlimited intermediate storage. Chem. Eng. Sci. 62:1549–66 [Google Scholar]
  38. Ferrer-Nadal S, Capón-García E, Méndez CA, Puigjaner L. 38.  2008. Material transfer operations in batch scheduling. A critical modeling issue. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 47:7721–32 [Google Scholar]
  39. Capón-García E, Ferrer-Nadal S, Graells M, Puigjaner L. 39.  2009. An extended formulation for the flexible short-term scheduling of multiproduct semicontinuous plants. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48:2009–19 [Google Scholar]
  40. Kopanos GM, Laínez JM, Puigjaner L. 40.  2009. An efficient mixed-integer linear programming scheduling framework for addressing sequence-dependent setup issues in batch plants. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48:6346–57 [Google Scholar]
  41. Gupta S, Karimi IA. 41.  2003. An improved MILP formulation for scheduling multiproduct, multistage batch plants. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 42:2365–80 [Google Scholar]
  42. Chen CL, Liu CL, Feng XD, Shao HH. 42.  2002. Optimal short-term scheduling of multiproduct single-stage batch plants with parallel lines. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 41:1249–60 [Google Scholar]
  43. Castro PM, Grossmann IE, Novais AQ. 43.  2006. Two new continuous-time models for the scheduling of multistage batch plants with sequence dependent changeovers. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45:6210–26 [Google Scholar]
  44. Méndez CA, Cerdá J. 44.  2003. An MILP continuous-time framework for short-term scheduling of multipurpose batch processes under different operation strategies. Optim. Eng. 4:7–22 [Google Scholar]
  45. Méndez CA, Henning GP, Cerdá J. 45.  2001. An MILP continuous-time approach to short-term scheduling of resource-constrained multistage flowshop batch facilities. Comput. Chem. Eng. 25:701–11 [Google Scholar]
  46. Lim MF, Karimi IA. 46.  2003. Resource-constrained scheduling of parallel production lines using asynchronous slots. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 42:6832–42 [Google Scholar]
  47. Méndez CA, Henning GP, Cerdá J. 47.  2000. Optimal scheduling of batch plants satisfying multiple product orders with different due-dates. Comput. Chem. Eng. 24:2223–45 [Google Scholar]
  48. Castro PM, Erdirik-Dogan M, Grossmann IE. 48.  2008. Simultaneous batching and scheduling of single stage batch plants with parallel units. AIChE J. 54:183–93 [Google Scholar]
  49. Prasad P, Maravelias CT. 49.  2008. Batch selection, assignment and sequencing in multi-stage multi-product processes. Comput. Chem. Eng. 32:1106–19 [Google Scholar]
  50. Sundaramoorthy A, Maravelias CT. 50.  2008. Simultaneous batching and scheduling in multistage multiproduct processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 47:1546–55 [Google Scholar]
  51. Sundaramoorthy A, Maravelias CT. 51.  2008. Modeling of storage in batching and scheduling of multistage processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 47:6648–60 [Google Scholar]
  52. Sundaramoorthy A, Maravelias CT, Prasad P. 52.  2009. Scheduling of multistage batch processes under utility constraints. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48:6050–58 [Google Scholar]
  53. Kondili E, Pantelides CC, Sargent RWH. 53.  1993. A general algorithm for short-term scheduling of batch-operations—1. MILP formulation. Comput. Chem. Eng. 17:211–27Presents the first general MIP scheduling model based on the state-task network representation and discrete modeling of time. [Google Scholar]
  54. Shah N, Pantelides CC, Sargent RWH. 54.  1993. A general algorithm for short-term scheduling of batch-operations—2. Computational issues. Comput. Chem. Eng. 17:229–44Provides the first effective discrete-time material-based model; the proposed solution methods were implemented using this model. [Google Scholar]
  55. Pantelides CC. 55.  1994. Unified frameworks for optimal process planning and scheduling Presented at 2nd Conf. Found. Comput. Aided Process Oper., Snowmass, CO
  56. Schilling G, Pantelides CC. 56.  1996. A simple continuous-time process scheduling formulation and a novel solution algorithm. Comput. Chem. Eng. 20:S1221–26 [Google Scholar]
  57. Mockus L, Reklaitis GV. 57.  1999. Continuous time representation approach to batch and continuous process scheduling. 1. MINLP formulation. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 38:197–203 [Google Scholar]
  58. Mockus L, Reklaitis GV. 58.  1999. Continuous time representation approach to batch and continuous process scheduling. 2. Computational issues. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 38:204–10 [Google Scholar]
  59. Castro P, Barbosa-Póvoa APFD, Matos H. 59.  2001. An improved RTN continuous-time formulation for the short-term scheduling of multipurpose batch plants. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 40:2059–68 [Google Scholar]
  60. Maravelias CT, Grossmann IE. 60.  2003. A general continuous state task network formulation for short term scheduling of multipurpose batch plants with due dates. Comput.-Aided Chem. Eng. 14:215 [Google Scholar]
  61. Sundaramoorthy A, Karimi IA. 61.  2005. A simpler better slot-based continuous-time formulation for short-term scheduling in multipurpose batch plants. Chem. Eng. Sci. 60:2679–702 [Google Scholar]
  62. Zhang X, Sargent RWH. 62.  1996. The optimal operation of mixed production facilities—a general formulation and some approaches for the solution. Comput. Chem. Eng. 20:897–904 [Google Scholar]
  63. Lee KH, Park HI, Lee IB. 63.  2001. A novel nonuniform discrete time formulation for short-term scheduling of batch and continuous processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 40:4902–11 [Google Scholar]
  64. Giannelos NF, Georgiadis MC. 64.  2002. A novel event-driven formulation for short-term scheduling of multipurpose continuous processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 41:2431–39 [Google Scholar]
  65. Ierapetritou MG, Floudas CA. 65.  1998. Effective continuous-time formulation for short-term scheduling. 1. Multipurpose batch processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 37:4341–59 [Google Scholar]
  66. Ierapetritou MG, Floudas CA. 66.  1998. Effective continuous-time formulation for short-term scheduling. 2. Continuous and semicontinuous processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 37:4360–74 [Google Scholar]
  67. Janak SL, Floudas CA. 67.  2008. Improving unit-specific event based continuous-time approaches for batch processes: integrality gap and task splitting. Comput. Chem. Eng. 32:913–55 [Google Scholar]
  68. Susarla N, Li J, Karimi IA. 68.  2010. A novel approach to scheduling multipurpose batch plants using unit-slots. AIChE J. 56:1859–79 [Google Scholar]
  69. Shaik MA, Floudas CA. 69.  2009. Novel unified modeling approach for short-term scheduling. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48:2947–64 [Google Scholar]
  70. Janak SL, Lin XX, Floudas CA. 70.  2004. Enhanced continuous-time unit-specific event-based formulation for short-term scheduling of multipurpose batch processes: resource constraints and mixed storage policies. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 43:2516–33 [Google Scholar]
  71. Saharidis GKD, Minoux M, Dallery Y. 71.  2009. Scheduling of loading and unloading of crude oil in a refinery using event-based discrete time formulation. Comput. Chem. Eng. 33:1413–26 [Google Scholar]
  72. Maravelias CT. 72.  2005. Mixed-time representation for state-task network models. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44:9129–45 [Google Scholar]
  73. Velez S, Maravelias CT. 73.  2013. Multiple and nonuniform time grids in discrete-time MIP models for chemical production scheduling. Comput. Chem. Eng. 53:70–85Presents the first discrete-time model that employs multiple and nonuniform task/unit/material-specific time grids. [Google Scholar]
  74. Baumann P, Trautmann N. 74.  2013. A continuous-time MILP model for short-term scheduling of make-and-pack production processes. Int. J. Prod. Res. 51:1707–27 [Google Scholar]
  75. Kelly JD, Zyngier D. 75.  2009. Multi-product inventory logistics modeling in the process industries. Optimization and Logistics Challenges in the Enterprise W Chaovalitwongse, KC Furman, PM Pardalos 61–95 New York: Springer [Google Scholar]
  76. Gimenez DM, Henning GP, Maravelias CT. 76.  2009. A novel network-based continuous-time representation for process scheduling: part I. Main concepts and mathematical formulation. Comput. Chem. Eng. 33:1511–28 [Google Scholar]
  77. Gimenez DM, Henning GP, Maravelias CT. 77.  2009. A novel network-based continuous-time representation for process scheduling: part II. General framework. Comput. Chem. Eng. 33:1644–60 [Google Scholar]
  78. Sundaramoorthy A, Maravelias CT. 78.  2011. A general framework for process scheduling. AIChE J. 57:695–710Offers the first model capable of representing problems in all facilities, including facilities consisting of different subsystems. [Google Scholar]
  79. Velez S, Maravelias CT. 79.  2013. Mixed-integer programming model and tightening methods for scheduling in general chemical production environments. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52:3407–23 [Google Scholar]
  80. Pochet Y, Wolsey LA. 80.  2006. Production Planning by Mixed Integer Programming New York/Berlin: Springer499
  81. Benders JF. 81.  1962. Partitioning procedures for solving mixed-variables programming problems. Numer. Math. 4:238–52 [Google Scholar]
  82. Fisher ML. 82.  1981. The Lagrangian relaxation method for solving integer programming problems. Manag. Sci. 27:1–18 [Google Scholar]
  83. Hooker J. 83.  2007. Integrated Methods for Optimization New York: Springer486
  84. Bussieck MR, Ferris MC, Meeraus A. 84.  2009. Grid-enabled optimization with GAMS. INFORMS J. Comput. 21:349–62 [Google Scholar]
  85. Pinto JM, Grossmann IE. 85.  1998. Assignment and sequencing models for the scheduling of process systems. Ann. Oper. Res. 81:433–66 [Google Scholar]
  86. Floudas CA, Lin XX. 86.  2004. Continuous-time versus discrete-time approaches for scheduling of chemical processes: a review. Comput. Chem. Eng. 28:2109–29 [Google Scholar]
  87. Mouret S, Grossmann IE, Pestiaux P. 87.  2011. Time representations and mathematical models for process scheduling problems. Comput. Chem. Eng. 35:1038–63 [Google Scholar]
  88. Blomer F, Gunther HO. 88.  2000. LP-based heuristics for scheduling chemical batch processes. Int. J. Prod. Res. 38:1029–51 [Google Scholar]
  89. Burkard RE, Hatzl J. 89.  2005. Review, extensions and computational comparison of MILP formulations for scheduling of batch processes. Comput. Chem. Eng. 29:1752–69 [Google Scholar]
  90. Sahinidis NV, Grossmann IE. 90.  1991. Reformulation of multiperiod MILP models for planning and scheduling of chemical processes. Comput. Chem. Eng. 15:255–72 [Google Scholar]
  91. Yee KL, Shah N. 91.  1998. Improving the efficiency of discrete time scheduling formulation. Comput. Chem. Eng. 22:Suppl. 1S403–S10 [Google Scholar]
  92. Papageorgiou LG, Pantelides CC. 92.  1996. Optimal campaign planning scheduling of multipurpose batch semicontinuous plants. 2. A mathematical decomposition approach. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 35:510–29 [Google Scholar]
  93. Bassett MH, Pekny JF, Reklaitis GV. 93.  1996. Decomposition techniques for the solution of large-scale scheduling problems. AIChE J. 42:3373–87 [Google Scholar]
  94. Kelly JD, Zyngier D. 94.  2008. Hierarchical decomposition heuristic for scheduling: coordinated reasoning for decentralized and distributed decision-making problems. Comput. Chem. Eng. 32:2684–705 [Google Scholar]
  95. Maravelias CT, Grossmann IE. 95.  2003. Minimization of the makespan with a discrete-time state-task network formulation. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 42:6252–57 [Google Scholar]
  96. Wu D, Ierapetritou MG. 96.  2003. Decomposition approaches for the efficient solution of short-term scheduling problems. Comput. Chem. Eng. 27:1261–76 [Google Scholar]
  97. Calfa BA, Agarwal A, Grossmann IE, Wassick JM. 97.  2013. Hybrid bilevel-Lagrangean decomposition scheme for the integration of planning and scheduling of a network of batch plants. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52:2152–67 [Google Scholar]
  98. Dimitriadis AD, Shah N, Pantelides CC. 98.  1997. RTN-based rolling horizon algorithms for medium term scheduling of multipurpose plants. Comput. Chem. Eng. 21:S1061–S66 [Google Scholar]
  99. Lin XX, Floudas CA, Modi S, Juhasz NM. 99.  2002. Continuous-time optimization approach for medium-range production scheduling of a multiproduct batch plant. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 41:3884–906 [Google Scholar]
  100. Méndez CA, Cerdá J. 100.  2003. Dynamic scheduling in multiproduct batch plants. Comput. Chem. Eng. 27:1247–59 [Google Scholar]
  101. Roslof J, Harjunkoski I, Bjorkqvist J, Karlsson S, Westerlund T. 101.  2001. An MILP-based reordering algorithm for complex industrial scheduling and rescheduling. Comput. Chem. Eng. 25:821–28 [Google Scholar]
  102. Kopanos GM, Méndez CA, Puigjaner L. 102.  2010. MIP-based decomposition strategies for large-scale scheduling problems in multiproduct multistage batch plants: a benchmark scheduling problem of the pharmaceutical industry. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 207:644–55 [Google Scholar]
  103. Jain V, Grossmann IE. 103.  2001. Algorithms for hybrid MILP/CP models for a class of optimization problems. INFORMS J. Comput. 13:258–76 [Google Scholar]
  104. Harjunkoski I, Grossmann IE. 104.  2002. Decomposition techniques for multistage scheduling problems using mixed-integer and constraint programming methods. Comput. Chem. Eng. 26:1533–52 [Google Scholar]
  105. Maravelias CT. 105.  2006. A decomposition framework for the scheduling of single- and multi-stage processes. Comput. Chem. Eng. 30:407–20 [Google Scholar]
  106. Maravelias CT, Grossmann IE. 106.  2004. A hybrid MILP/CP decomposition approach for the continuous time scheduling of multipurpose batch plants. Comput. Chem. Eng. 28:1921–49 [Google Scholar]
  107. Roe B, Papageorgiou LG, Shah N. 107.  2005. A hybrid MILP/CLP algorithm for multipurpose batch process scheduling. Comput. Chem. Eng. 29:1277–91 [Google Scholar]
  108. Subrahmanyam S, Kudva GK, Bassett HH, Pekny JF. 108.  1996. Application of distributed computing to batch plant design and scheduling. AIChE J. 42:1648–61 [Google Scholar]
  109. Ferris MC, Maravelias CT, Sundaramoorthy A. 109.  2009. Simultaneous batching and scheduling using dynamic decomposition on a grid. INFORMS J. Comput. 21:398–410 [Google Scholar]
  110. Velez S, Maravelias CT. 110.  2013. A branch-and-bound algorithm for the solution of chemical production scheduling MIP models using parallel computing. Comput. Chem. Eng. 55:28–39 [Google Scholar]
  111. Pochet Y, Warichet F. 111.  2008. A tighter continuous time formulation for the cyclic scheduling of a mixed plant. Comput. Chem. Eng. 32:2723–44 [Google Scholar]
  112. Maravelias CT, Papalamprou K. 112.  2009. Polyhedral results for discrete-time production planning MIP formulations for continuous processes. Comput. Chem. Eng. 33:1890–904 [Google Scholar]
  113. Maravelias CT. 113.  2012. On the combinatorial structure of discrete-time MIP formulations for chemical production scheduling. Comput. Chem. Eng. 38:204–12 [Google Scholar]
  114. Sundaramoorthy A, Maravelias CT. 114.  2011. Computational study of network-based mixed-integer programming approaches for chemical production scheduling. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 50:5023–40Provides an extensive computational comparison between continuous- and discrete-time models; it shows that discrete-time models are better. [Google Scholar]
  115. Merchan AF, Velez S, Maravelias CT. 115.  2013. Tightening methods for continuous-time mixed-integer programming models for chemical production scheduling. AIChE J. 59:124461–67 [Google Scholar]
  116. Grossmann IE, Biegler LT. 116.  2004. Part II. Future perspective on optimization. Comput. Chem. Eng. 28:1193–218 [Google Scholar]
  117. Subramanian K, Maravelias CT, Rawlings JB. 117.  2012. A state-space model for chemical production scheduling. Comput. Chem. Eng. 47:97–110 [Google Scholar]
  118. Dantzig G, Fulkerson R, Johnson S. 118.  1954. Solution of a large-scale traveling-salesman problem. J. Oper. Res. Soc. Am. 2:393–410 [Google Scholar]
  119. Gomory RE. 119.  1958. Outline of an algorithm for integer solutions to linear programs. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 64:275–78 [Google Scholar]
  120. Land AH, Doig AG. 120.  1960. An automatic method of solving discrete programming problems. Econometrica 28:497–520 [Google Scholar]
  121. Dakin RJ. 121.  1965. A tree-search algorithm for mixed integer programming problems. Comput. J. 8:250–53 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error