Faculty Course Scheduling Optimization
Faculty course scheduling optimization is the second of the three stages of the University Course Timetable Problem optimization. The optimization process was modeled using genetic algorithms, binary integer programming, and linear programming. There are four simple problems and four difficult problems that were used in the study. Linear programming had the highest total rating but infeasible because it produced fractional timetable values. Since the output of both genetic algorithms and binary integer programming were feasible and the total rating of binary integer programming was higher, it was considered as the best model. The binary integer programming model gives the optimal solution for as long as formulation of the needed functions and constraints is possible and the solver can process them. An alternative model is the genetic algorithms that is capable of giving feasible solutions even in very complicated scheduling conditions. The linear programming model is the basis of the correctness of the output provided by the other two models because its optimum value is usually higher than the other models.
. G. S. Tacadao. “A constraint logic programming approach to the course timetabling problem using eclipse”. ADDU-SAS Graduate School Research Journal, vol. 8, no. 1, 2011.
. S. Abdennadher and M. Marte. “University course timetabling using constraint handling rules”. Applied Artificial Intelligence, vol. 14, issue 4, pp 311-325, Apr. 2000.
. K. Schimmelpfeng, and S. Helber. “Application of a real-world university-course timetabling model solved by integer programming”. OR Spectrum, vol. 29, issue 4, pp. 783-803, Oct. 2007.
. S. I. Kanu, B. A. Ozurumba, and I. C. Emerole. “Application of Linear Programming Techniques to Practical Decision Making”. Mathematical Theory and Modeling, vol.4, no.9, 2014.
. Limitations of Linear Programming. Universal Teacher Publication. (http://www.universalteacherpublications.com/univ/ebooks)
. Y. Wang. “Using genetic algorithm methods to solve course scheduling problems”. Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 25, issue 1, p39, Jul. 2003.
. R. H. Mc Clure and C. E. Wells. “A mathematical programming model for faculty course assignments”. Decision Sciences, vol. 15, issue 3, pp. 409–420, 1984.
. S. Yang, and N. S. Jat. “Genetic algorithms with guided and local search strategies for university course timetabling”. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man & Cybernetics: Part C – Applications & Reviews, vol. 41, issue 1, pp. 93-106, Jan 2011.
. B. A. McCarl and T.H. Spreen. Applied Mathematical Programming Using Algebraic System, Texas, TX, Texas A&M University - College Station, 2002.
. G. Lach and M. Lubbecke. “Curriculum based course timetabling: new solutions to Udine benchmark instances”. Annals of Operations Research, vol. 194, issue 1, pp. 255-272, Apr. 2012.
. S. A. MirHassani. “A computational approach to enhancing course timetabling with integer programming”. Applied Mathematics & Computation, vol. 175, issue 1, pp. 814-822, Apr. 2006.
- There are currently no refbacks.