
The carcinogenic and endocrine-disrupting PAHs were investigated in surface water of the north-western creeks of India. The concentrations of ΣPAHs were found to vary in the range of 114.32-347.04 μg L-1, (mean 224.78 ± 8.85 μg L-1), out of which 49.12% contribution is due to ΣC-PAHs. The assessment of toxicity and biological risk arising due to individual C-PAHs was made by calculating their toxic equivalent quantity. The level of individual C-PAHs was reported exceeding the final chronic values, Canadian water quality guideline values and Netherlands maximum permissible concentration values set for the protection of aquatic life. The mean BaP concentration (10.32 ± 2.75 μg L-1) was above the European Directive 2008/105/EC Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) value; while the sum of BkF + BbF (26.76 μg L-1) and BghiP + InP (19.59 μg L-1) were significantly higher than that set by the EQS. The results of the present study will help in understanding the global distribution and fate of PAHs which is required for implementing the necessary steps towards mitigation of the ecotoxicological risk arising due to the existence of such contaminants in the aquatic environment across the world.
Citation: P. U. Singare, J.P. Shirodkar. Persistent and carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the north-western coastal marine environment of India[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2021, 8(2): 169-189. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2021012
[1] | Chukwuebuka C. Okafor, Juliet C. Ibekwe, Chinelo A. Nzekwe, Charles C. Ajaero, Chiadika M. Ikeotuonye . Estimating emissions from open-burning of uncollected municipal solid waste in Nigeria. AIMS Environmental Science, 2022, 9(2): 140-160. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2022011 |
[2] | Pasquale Avino, Maurizio Manigrasso . Ozone formation in relation with combustion processes in highly populated urban areas. AIMS Environmental Science, 2015, 2(3): 764-781. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2015.3.764 |
[3] | Luigi Falletti, Lino Conte, Andrea Maestri . Upgrading of a wastewater treatment plant with a hybrid moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR). AIMS Environmental Science, 2014, 1(2): 45-52. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2014.2.45 |
[4] | Anwar Khan, Benjamin Razis, Simon Gillespie, Carl Percival, Dudley Shallcross . Global analysis of carbon disulfide (CS2) using the 3-D chemistry transport model STOCHEM. AIMS Environmental Science, 2017, 4(3): 484-501. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2017.3.484 |
[5] | María E. García, Lara S. Della Ceca, María I. Micheletti, Rubén D. Piacentini, Mariano Ordano, Nora J. F. Reyes, Sebastián Buedo, Juan A. González . Satellite and ground atmospheric particulate matter detection over Tucumán city, Argentina, space-time distribution, climatic and seasonal variability. AIMS Environmental Science, 2018, 5(3): 173-194. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2018.3.173 |
[6] | Patrick Wanjiru, Nancy Karuri, Paul Wanyeki, Paul Kioni, Josephat Tanui . Numerical simulation of the effect of diluents on NOx formation in methane and methyl formate fuels in counter flow diffusion flame. AIMS Environmental Science, 2020, 7(2): 140-152. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2020008 |
[7] | Isabel Pariente María, Martínez Fernando, ÁngelBotas Juan, AntonioMelero Juan . Extrusion of Fe2O3/SBA-15 mesoporous material for application as heterogeneous Fenton-like catalyst. AIMS Environmental Science, 2015, 1(2): 154-168. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2015.2.154 |
[8] | R. Kajaste, P. Oinas . Plastics value chain - Abatement of greenhouse gas emissions. AIMS Environmental Science, 2021, 8(4): 371-392. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2021024 |
[9] | Tiffany L. B. Yelverton, David G. Nash, James E. Brown, Carl F. Singer, Jeffrey V. Ryan, Peter H. Kariher . Dry sorbent injection of trona to control acid gases from a pilot-scale coal-fired combustion facility. AIMS Environmental Science, 2016, 3(1): 45-57. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2016.1.45 |
[10] | Sayali Sandbhor, Sayali Apte, Vaishnavi Dabir, Ketan Kotecha, Rajkumar Balasubramaniyan, Tanupriya Choudhury . AI-based carbon emission forecast and mitigation framework using recycled concrete aggregates: A sustainable approach for the construction industry. AIMS Environmental Science, 2023, 10(6): 894-910. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2023048 |
The carcinogenic and endocrine-disrupting PAHs were investigated in surface water of the north-western creeks of India. The concentrations of ΣPAHs were found to vary in the range of 114.32-347.04 μg L-1, (mean 224.78 ± 8.85 μg L-1), out of which 49.12% contribution is due to ΣC-PAHs. The assessment of toxicity and biological risk arising due to individual C-PAHs was made by calculating their toxic equivalent quantity. The level of individual C-PAHs was reported exceeding the final chronic values, Canadian water quality guideline values and Netherlands maximum permissible concentration values set for the protection of aquatic life. The mean BaP concentration (10.32 ± 2.75 μg L-1) was above the European Directive 2008/105/EC Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) value; while the sum of BkF + BbF (26.76 μg L-1) and BghiP + InP (19.59 μg L-1) were significantly higher than that set by the EQS. The results of the present study will help in understanding the global distribution and fate of PAHs which is required for implementing the necessary steps towards mitigation of the ecotoxicological risk arising due to the existence of such contaminants in the aquatic environment across the world.
The economy of China is expanding rapidly with the increasing demand for air freight services. Since 2008, China's air cargo and postal transport volume maintains sustained growth, from 4.076 million tons in 2008 to 8.632 million tons in 2020 [1], meanwhile the products needed to be transported become more diversified, a large amount of high value-added goods including fresh goods, seasonal or precious commodities appear. In other words, the situations of multi batch, small batch, fast transportation are more prominent, and higher real-time requirement is presented compared with other logistics industries.
In order to improve the efficiency of air freight transport system, an efficient automated multi-dimensional warehouse with ETVs needs to be established, and as the basis of the system, a proper scheduling strategy considering the assignment of cargo locations as well as the sequence of inbound/outbound tasks should be designed.
From limited references in the past few years, the relevant research mainly focus on deciding the cargoes' transportation sequence. Guo [2] and Qiu et al. [3] studied the inbound and outbound cargoes scheduling problem with single ETV and solved it with particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm. Different from the above single ETV scheduling problem, Lei [4] discussed the task scheduling problem with dual ETVs considering collision avoidance and introduced expert system to improve the operation efficiency. Ding [5] proposed task chain generation algorithm with improved shared fitness strategy and applied it to assign two ETVs to different cargo areas.
The works mentioned above developed different scheduling models with considering picking sequence and ETV routing, but they neglected to discuss the problem of assignment of input and output ports (I/O ports) if the air freight station has several entrances and exits. On the other hand, previous scheduling problems have been solved with different intelligent algorithms, but a more efficient algorithm needs to be designed for improving the efficiency and accuracy as the problems become more complex. In our research, ABC algorithm which possesses strong global optimization ability and few parameters [6,7,8,9] is first introduced to solve the scheduling problem in air freight transport system.
Actually, as one of the most recently defined bio-inspired algorithms, ABC is motivated by the swarm intelligence behaviors of gregarious colony, and it has been proved to be useful in solving various engineering problems, such as civil engineering design [10], aerospace industry [11], software testing [12], logistics warehouse management [13], manufacturing production [14], communication problem [15] and so on. However, it often suffers from the problems of poor exploitation and slow convergence, so developing new search mechanisms is crucial for complex optimization problems. Recently, other metaheuristic algorithms were introduced and combined with traditional ABC to improve its performance. Ghanem et al. [16] incorporated monarch butterfly optimization into ABC. The firework explosion search mechanism was introduced to explore the potential food sources of ABC in [17]. Gaidhane et al. [18] mixed ABC with grey wolf optimizer to balance the exploration and exploitation capabilities. Liang et al. [19] introduced differential operator in employed bee phase and revised the selection probability to be a step function. Moreover, another improving idea was to replace the single search strategy in original ABC with two or more search strategies. Xu et al. [20] introduced differential evolution strategy in employed bee phase to accelerate its convergence and adopted the global best position to guide the following updating processes in onlooker bee phase which could enhance the local search ability. Literature [21] proposed two search strategies with the help of the information of the best-so-far solution and the mean of two random solutions. In [22], three search strategies with different characteristics were employed to construct a strategy candidate pool, and the Parzen window method was applied to select the best candidate individuals. Two new search strategies were adopted based on the k-neighborhood of best solution in [23] which didn't need to calculate the selection probability. Different from the above literatures, from the perspective of improving the search mechanism, Zhang et al. [24] proposed a new search mechanism named full-dimensional ABC algorithm (fdABC), it was executed with all dimensions of each solution thus the search area could be expanded and the probability of obtaining the optimal solution could be improved. Although the proposed algorithm possessed better optimization performance especially for high-dimensional optimization problems, the time cost increased substantially because more dimensions needed to be updated compared with traditional ABC. In this paper, improvement on the search mechanisms is introduced and applied to solve the scheduling problem in air freight station.
The main features that distinguish this study from previous studies are presented below. a) For solving the tasks scheduling problem in airport container storage area with several I/O ports, the model considering the assignment of I/O ports, as well as the optimization of picking sequence and ETVs' travelling route is first established. The proposed modeling method could be applied to all scheduling problems of storage systems in fast moving consumer goods industry, e-commerce industry and logistics industry; b) In order to balance the abilities of exploration and exploitation of ABC algorithm, two improvements on search mechanisms are proposed. Different from original ABC that only one dimension is randomly updated, improvement is realized by saving the most valuable dimension of current solution and guiding the direction of subsequent exploration. Related improvement could be adopted to solve all optimization and scheduling problems in engineering fields.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces the scheduling model with dual ETVs in the freight station of Luoyang Beijiao Airport. Then ABC and IMABC algorithms are proposed in Section 3, and their optimization performance is verified on benchmark functions. In Section 4, the improved algorithms are applied to the dual ETVs scheduling problem and their effectiveness is proved. Finally, the above work is summarized.
The air freight station in Luoyang Beijiao Airport consists of three parts, which are container storage area, bulk cargo storage area, and unhandled cargo area respectively as shown in Figure 1.
As the core of the whole system, the container storage area is used for handling the containerized cargoes, which are unloaded from aircraft in the airside or inbounded from the bulk cargo storage area in the landside. It is a three-dimensional warehouse with two rows of shelves and 16 I/O ports, each row has eight layers and 60 columns, the total slots are 60×8×2=960. Two ETVs are employed for handling cargoes between the 14 I/O ports in airside and the two I/O ports in landside, and each ETV is responsible for half of the shelf and I/O ports.
The operational process of the two ETVs is depicted as Figure 2 (some columns and I/O ports are omitted). ETVs start from R1 and R3 respectively, the 1# ETV picks up cargo at entrance R2, and stores it at I1. And then, it retrieves outbound cargo from O2 and delivers it to the exit C1. The same actions are executed with 2# ETV from R3 to C2.
Obviously, in order to improve the efficiency of cargo transportation in the container storage area, the sequence of inbound/outbound tasks as well as the corresponding I/O ports need to be scheduled, meanwhile the actions of ETVs should be optimized to obtain the minimum running time.
For solving the scheduling problem, the objective function should be established firstly based on the notations defined in Table 1.
Indices | Description |
x | The horizontal direction |
y | The vertical direction |
c | The number of columns between two slots in the shelf |
l | The number of layers between two slots in the shelf |
i | Task number, i= 1, 2, ..., n |
j | Number of ETV, j= 1, 2 |
Parameters | Description |
Vx | the horizontal travelling speeds of ETV, Vx=120(m/min) |
Vy | the vertical travelling speeds of ETV, Vy=20(m/min) |
ax | the horizontal acceleration of ETV, ax=0.5(m/s2) |
ay | the vertical acceleration of ETV, ay=0.3(m/s2) |
Txa | the time needed to travel horizontally from static to the maximum speed and immediately decreases to 0, Txa=2×Vxax=8(s) |
Tya | the time needed to lift vertically from static to the maximum speed and immediately decreases to 0, Tya=2×Vyay=2.2(s) |
Dx | the total travelling distance needed to travel from static to the maximum speed or from maximum speed to 0, Dx=14×ax×Txa2=8(m) |
Dy | the total lifting distance needed to travel from static to the maximum speed or from maximum speed to 0, Dy=14×ay×Tya2=0.36(m) |
w | width of the storage location, w=3.75(m) |
h | height of the storage location, h=3.75(m) |
δ | the execution time for ETV to load or unload cargoes, δ= 25(s) |
Variables | Description |
Txc | the time needed to move between two positions whose interval is c in horizontal direction |
Tyl | the time taken to move between two positions whose interval is l in vertical direction |
Hio | for the i-th task, the running time needed for travelling from the current position to the nearest I/O port |
Hi1 | The time of the i-th task for travelling from the current position to the scheduled target. |
M1 | working area of 1# ETV, 1≤M1≤30 |
M2 | working area of 2# ETV, 31≤M2≤60 |
fitj | the total time of the j-th ETV needed to finish the scheduled task |
If there are several inbound and outbound tasks in the storage area, the objective of optimized problem which is named as fitness function is to minimize the total execution time Hmax between two ETVs under the constraints in Eq (2).
Minimize Hmax=max{fit1,fit2} | (1) |
s.t.{|M1−M2|≥4set=set1∪set2,set1≠set2 | (2) |
fitj=∑ni=1(Hi0+Hi1)+2nδ | (3) |
The first constraint in Eq (2) ensures that the columns between two ETVs at any time are no less than four, which could avoid collision with each other. As the task set is divided into two equal parts and assigned to two ETVs, the second constraint avoids repeated allocation. The time fitj in Eq (3) is defined as the summation of execution time Hio and Hi1 of n tasks assigned to the specific ETV, it is the total time cost for picking up, releasing as well as transporting all assigned cargoes. Here the execution time Hio and Hi1 corresponding to different tasks can be obtained from Table 2 (Only the values corresponding to the first five layers and six columns are listed), which are calculated from Eqs (4) and (5). The first row and first column of Table 2 respectively represent the number of difference of rows and columns between the start position and destination in the shelf.
{Txc=2∗√w∗cax,w∗c≤Dx;Txc=Txa+w∗c−DxVx,w∗c>Dx. | (4) |
{Tyl=2∗√h∗lay,h∗l≤Dy;Tyl=Tya+h∗l−DyVy,h∗l>Dy. | (5) |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
1 | 0 | 5.47 | 7.74 | 9.62 | 11.50 | 13.37 |
2 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 13.37 |
3 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 |
4 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 |
5 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 |
For solving the above nonlinear scheduling problem, an effective optimization algorithm should be introduced.
ABC is an optimization algorithm based on the intelligent foraging behavior of honeybee swarm, where the bee colony consists of three groups: employed bees, onlooker bees and scout bees. The position of a food source represents an optimal solution of the specific problem, and its quality could be evaluated through the fitness value of the corresponding solution [9,25].
The algorithm starts iterative optimization from employed bee phase, it executes a crossover and mutation process with one randomly chosen companion, and the new solution x'mk is updated based on xmk as shown in Eq (6). Then the fitness value of each solution fitnessm could be calculated, and the onlooker bee randomly chooses to exploit or not around corresponding employed bee with the probability Pm defined as Eq (7). If the current mth solution to be exploited cannot improve for several iterations, it will be abandoned, and a scout bee corresponding to a new randomly produced solution will replace it.
x'mk=xmk+rand(−1,1)∗(xmk−xnk) | (6) |
Pm=fitnessm∑SNm=1fitnessm | (7) |
where m, n represent the indices of specific solution in the population, m,n∈{1,2,…,N}m≠n. k is the dimension of the population, k∈{1,2,…,D}.rand(−1,1) is a random number between [-1, 1]. SN is the number of food sources as well as the number of employed bees.
In ABC algorithm, for each solution, only one dimension is randomly selected and updated according to Eq (6) in employed bee phase and onlooker bee phase. In this case, the updated dimension may be different in each iteration and the optimal dimension obtained in the previous iteration is likely to be omitted in the following iterations. Thus, the search toward the possible optimal solutions is unable to be continued, the optimization accuracy and the convergence speed will be affected.
In [23], full dimensional search strategy (fdABC) is introduced to traverse all dimensions of the solution and select the optimal dimension for further exploration, therefore the search could be extended and the possibility of obtaining optimal solution will be improved, but the optimization time increases inevitably. Another improvement called random multi-dimensional artificial bee colony algorithm (RmdABC) is mentioned in [26], the key improvement of the strategy is to randomly select several different dimensions from {1,2,…,D} for one solution, and execute the updated process with Eq (6) in the employed bee and onlooker bee phases. Obviously, it randomly traverses any several dimensions of the solution in each iteration, and fewer dimensions are updated compared with fdABC, as the result, its time complexity could be greatly improved.
In order to further balance the abilities of exploration and exploitation, IMABC strategy is proposed where more valuable dimensions of solution will be picked out and saved in the external set which is used to guide the subsequent exploration. The operations of IMABC are shown as Figure 3 and outlined as follows:
1) In the first iteration, all dimensions of the solution are searched, and new solutions are generated with Eq (6) in employed bee and onlooker bee phases.
2) The fitness values of the generated solutions need to be compared with the optimal one, and if the new solution is superior to the old one, the solution in that dimension could be recognized as having the potential to be optimized, thus the optimal solution should be substituted with the generated one, the valuable dimension will be recorded in the external set and the flag is set to be one.
3) In employed bee and onlooker bee phases, after updating all dimensions of the solution, the value of flag will be checked. If the flag sign is equal to one, it means there is at least one dimension has been updated. If flag sign is zero, it demonstrates that the exploration is failed, and the number of iteration trial should increase by 1.
if sign==1then trial=0; |
else trial=trial+1 |
When the whole cycle is greater than or equal to the value of MaxCycle, if trial < Limit, the above updating operations based on the stored optimal dimensions should be performed iteratively. If trial > Limit, the value of trial resets back to zero and a new random solution will be generated to replace the old one.
Obviously, more dimensions will be explored in IMABC, it could cover more solution space and the ability of exploration could be improved compared with ABC algorithm. Meanwhile, with the help of the stored optimal dimension searched so far, the speed towards the global optimal solution could be accelerated and the ability of exploitation will be enhanced compared with fdABC and RmdABC. Therefore, the performance of the exploration and exploitation could be balanced.
The pseudo-code of IMABC is given below.
Improved Multi-dimensional ABC | |
01 | Initialization, set the maximum cycle number, the swarm size, the number of dimensions, the value of limit |
02 | for iter = 1 to MaxCycle //Employed bee phase |
03 | for m = 1 to Number of food sources |
04 | flag = 0; |
05 | if flag(m) = = 0, do |
06 | flag(m) = D, Dim(m, :) = (1:D); |
07 | end if |
08 | Temp = 0; //temp is used to temporarily store the number of currently mineable dimensions //greed strategy on multi-dimension |
09 | for j = 1 to flag(m) |
10 | Neighborhood search of employed bees with Eq (6); |
11 | Evaluate the fitness value fitness(Solm) with Eq (7); |
12 | if fitness(Solm) < fitness(Foodm), do |
13 | Foodm = Solm; Dim(m, temp) = Param2Change; sign = 1; temp = temp + 1; |
14 | end if |
15 | end for |
16 | flag(m) = temp; |
17 | if sign = 1 do |
18 | trial = 0; |
19 | else |
20 | trial = trial + 1; |
21 | end if |
22 | end for // onlooker bee phase |
23 | Calculate the probability probm if the onlooker bees choose to exploit around the specific source |
24 | for m = 1 to Food Number |
25 | sign = 0; |
26 | if rand < probm, do |
27 | Sign = 0; |
28 | if flag(m) = = 0, do |
29 | flag(m) = D, Dim(m, :) = (1:D); |
30 | end if |
31 | Temp = 0; // temp is used to temporarily store the number of currently mineable dimensions |
32 | for j = 1 to flag(m) |
33 | Neighborhood search of onlooker bees with Eq (6); |
34 | Evaluate the fitness values of the generated solutions by Eq (7); |
35 | if fitness(Solm) < fitness(Foodm), do |
36 | Foodm = Solm; sign = 1; temp = temp + 1; Dim(m, temp) = Param2Change; |
37 | end if |
38 | end for |
39 | flag(m) = temp; |
40 | if sign = 1, do |
41 | trial = 0; |
42 | else |
43 | trial = trial + 1; |
44 | end if |
45 | end if |
46 | end for |
//scout bee phase | |
47 | if trial > limit, do |
48 | trial = 0; |
49 | randomly generate a new solution |
50 | end if |
51 | end for |
In order to evaluate the performance of the proposed IMABC algorithm, nine CEC 2017 benchmark functions as listed in Table 3 are employed, where f1(x), f2(x) and f6(x) are unimodal functions, and the others are multi-modal functions. All simulations are executed on an Intel Core i7-8750H CPU with 8G RAM, the population size is 200, the dimension of solution is set to 60, 80 and 100 respectively, the number of maximum iterations is set as being 1000, and the limit used in scout bee phase is taken 100. Independent experiments are run 20 trials, the indices including the mean and standard deviation (Mean ± std dev) which reflect the quality of solution and the stability of algorithm, the average running time (Aver-R), the shortest running time (Best-R) and fitness value of the optimal solution (Best-F) are selected to evaluate the optimization performance of different algorithms.
Function expression | Searching space | Minimum value | Modality |
f1(x)=x21+106∑Di=2x2i | [−100,100] | 0 | Unimodal |
f2(x)=∑Di=1|xi|i+1 | [−100,100] | 0 | Unimodal |
f3(x)=∑D−1i=1(100(xi2−xi+1)2+(xi−1)2) | [−100,100] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f4(x)=−20exp(−0.2√1n∑ni=1x2i)−exp(1n∑ni=1cos(2πxi))+20+e | [−5,5] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f5(x)=∑ni=1[x2i−10cos(2πxi)+10] | [−500,500] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f6(x)=∑ni=1(|xi+0.5|)2 | [−100,100] | 0 | Unimodal |
f7(x)=∑Di=1(x2i−10cos(2πxi)+10) | [−5.12,5.12] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f8(x)=sin2(πw1)+∑D−1i=1(wi−1)2[1+10sin2(πwi+1)]+(wD−1)2[1+sin2(2πwD)] wi=1+xi−14,∀i=1,…,D |
[−10,10] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f9(x)=−20exp(−0.2√1D∑Di=1x2i)−exp(1D∑Di=1cos(2πxi))+20+e | [−32.768,32.768] | 0 | Multi-modal |
Tables 4–6 illustrate the optimization results with four different algorithms in different dimensions, where the best results among the four indices are highlighted in bold font. As can be seen from the tables, all algorithms could solve the nonlinear problems within limited time, the average running time Aver-R and the shortest running time Best-R increase from 60 dimensions to 100 dimensions because more dimensions need to be updated for all algorithms.
Aver-R(s) | Mean ± std dev | Best-F | Best-R(s) | ||
f1(x) | ABC | 111.849 | 2.320e+5 ± 4.515e+4 | 1.709e+5 | 111.4955 |
fdABC | 253.316 | 2.929e-252 ± 0 | 1.416e-252 | 251.577 | |
RmdABC | 188.172 | 1.654e-2 ± 1.433e-2 | 1.49e-4 | 179.199 | |
IMABC | 29.213 | 3.469e-159 ± 5.567e-159 | 1.6314e-160 | 28.702 | |
f2(x) | ABC | 121.258 | 3.024e+41 ± 6.658e+41 | 1.593e+36 | 120.909 |
fdABC | 676.282 | 8.680e-255 ± 0 | 7.047e-258 | 672.294 | |
RmdABC | 401.083 | 2.091e-42 ± 4.015e-42 | 6.660e-46 | 395.373 | |
IMABC | 229.23419 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 383.842 | |
f3(x) | ABC | 116.400 | 5490.448 ± 4756.626 | 4884.468 | 115.536 |
fdABC | 284.881 | 2.33e-3 ± 1.35e-3 | 1.27e-4 | 279.176 | |
RmdABC | 212.479 | 1.1359 ± 0.955 | 0.323 | 208.025 | |
IMABC | 79.286 | 0.0018 ± 0.0020 | 4.004e-05 | 78.222 | |
f4(x) | ABC | 122.561 | 0.0294 ± 0.0017 | 0.0266 | 121.327 |
fdABC | 266.4800 | 6.271e-14 ± 3.432e-15 | 5.773e-14 | 272.640 | |
RmdABC | 203.594 | 4.250e-06 ± 3.376e-06 | 1.808e-07 | 200.635 | |
IMABC | 58.415 | 6.306e-14 ± 3.837e-15 | 5.773e-14 | 55.179 | |
f5(x) | ABC | 121.356 | 198.642 ± 12.773 | 179.002 | 121.051 |
fdABC | 250.787 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 245.425 | |
RmdABC | 190.324 | 4.145e-06 ± 5.252e-06 | 2.271e-07 | 189.681 | |
IMABC | 52.091 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 51.353288 | |
f6(x) | ABC | 120.309 | 0.232 ± 0.029 | 0.177 | 119.949 |
fdABC | 224.032 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 218.470 | |
RmdABC | 178.819 | 1.262e-08 ± 1.059e-08 | 4.285e-10 | 178.200 | |
IMABC | 29.427 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 28.468 | |
f7(x) | ABC | 123.764 | 4.449e-09 ± 3.849e-09 | 5.566e-10 | 122.544 |
fdABC | 255.694 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 254.511 | |
RmdABC | 192.567 | 4.210e-08 ± 3.580e-08 | 4.677e-10 | 190.664 | |
IMABC | 84.560 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 82.977 | |
f8(x) | ABC | 127.611 | 1.354e-05 ± 1.623e-05 | 2.079e-07 | 126.884 |
fdABC | 256.347 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 254.650 | |
RmdABC | 194.270 | 8.781e-11 ± 2.043e-10 | 6.019e-15 | 192.641 | |
IMABC | 90.816 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 88.339 | |
f9(x) | ABC | 125.083 | 1.694 ± 0.0995 | 1.518 | 123.144 |
fdABC | 221.099 | 6.484e-14 ± 2.901e-15 | 5.773e-14 | 220.187 | |
RmdABC | 195.0828 | 1.738 ± 3.070 | 1.224e-05 | 188.5410 | |
IMABC | 35.2991 | 0.058 ± 0.183 | 5.773e-14 | 34.9160 |
Aver-R(s) | Mean ± std dev | Best-F | Best-R(s) | ||
f1(x) | ABC | 186.356 | 7.443e+7 ± 9.252e+6 | 6.612e+7 | 185.785 |
fdABC | 349.896 | 9.500e-252 ± 0 | 1.073e-251 | 341.500 | |
RmdABC | 254.843 | 1.830 ± 2.791 | 0.187 | 242.967 | |
IMABC | 37.905 | 2.141e-150 ± 2.160e-150 | 1.580e-151 | 37.526 | |
f2(x) | ABC | 161.169 | 7.666e+82 ± 2.424e+83 | 9.065e+73 | 157.306 |
fdABC | 1092.133 | 5.377e-250 ± 0 | 9.849e-253 | 1083.415 | |
RmdABC | 641.927 | 1.236e-18 ± 3.277e-18 | 4.733e-22 | 629.479 | |
IMABC | 385.096 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 383.842 | |
f3(x) | ABC | 153.868 | 65508.192 ± 5912.818 | 53885.588 | 152.849 |
fdABC | 408.311 | 0.00517 ± 0.00572 | 0.000291 | 393.921 | |
RmdABC | 297.845 | 2.626 ± 1.258 | 1.1049 | 287.474 | |
IMABC | 111.143 | 0.00295 ± 0.00379 | 2.251e-05 | 100.158 | |
f4(x) | ABC | 155.879 | 0.152 ± 0.00873 | 0.140 | 155.490 |
fdABC | 381.999 | 8.757e-14 ± 5.605e-15 | 7.905e-14 | 368.461 | |
RmdABC | 279.508 | 2.649e-05 ± 1.28648e-05 | 9.587e-06 | 275.084 | |
IMABC | 79.558 | 8.900e-14 ± 3.669e-15 | 8.615e-14 | 77.818 | |
f5(x) | ABC | 155.747 | 759.215 ± 50.780 | 687.486 | 153.785 |
fdABC | 351.982 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 346.306 | |
RmdABC | 275.060 | 0.0184 ± 0.0096 | 0.0056 | 270.149 | |
IMABC | 74.003 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 72.661 | |
f6(x) | ABC | 151.843 | 8.142 ± 0.982 | 6.349 | 151.444 |
fdABC | 300.048 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 297.340 | |
RmdABC | 537.590 | 6.049e-07 ± 6.005e-07 | 2.1807e-08 | 373.611 | |
IMABC | 56.487 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 53.586 | |
f7(x) | ABC | 162.425 | 6.674e-08 ± 8.736e-08 | 1.244e-09 | 161.965 |
fdABC | 344.317 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 341.703 | |
RmdABC | 266.554 | 3.471e-07 ± 5.419e-07 | 1.397e-08 | 260.925 | |
IMABC | 112.593 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 111.564 | |
f8(x) | ABC | 165.271 | 2.556e-05 ± 2.445e-05 | 9.431e-08 | 164.439 |
fdABC | 344.205 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 343.570 | |
RmdABC | 260.079 | 2.892e-10 ± 3.535e-10 | 1.326e-14 | 258.259 | |
IMABC | 121.254 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 119.521 | |
f9(x) | ABC | 162.977 | 3.614 ± 0.087 | 3.503 | 161.545 |
fdABC | 306.928 | 8.971e-14 ± 3.745e-15 | 8.615e-14 | 301.461 | |
RmdABC | 273.895 | 2.0297e-04 ± 1.3504e-04 | 9.416e-05 | 261.859 | |
IMABC | 56.5127 | 0.086 ± 0.272 | 7.905e-14 | 54.828 |
Aver-R(s) | Mean ± std dev | Best-F | Best-R(s) | ||
f1(x) | ABC | 223.196 | 3.787e+8 ± 3.315e+7 | 3.416e+8 | 222.774 |
fdABC | 425.692 | 2.044e-251 ± 0 | 1.091e-251 | 420.020 | |
RmdABC | 303.243 | 12.037 ± 13.399 | 0.405 | 300.169 | |
IMABC | 47.675 | 2.788e-144 ± 1.955e-144 | 6.548e-145 | 47.180 | |
f2(x) | ABC | 199.808 | 2.279e+120 ± 4.714e+120 | 7.215e+111 | 197.343 |
fdABC | 1664.371 | 1.671e-245 ± 0 | 6.863e-248 | 1619.398 | |
RmdABC | 920.823 | 3.470e-06 ± 9.807e-06 | 4.151e-09 | 911.149 | |
IMABC | 583.836 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 579.155 | |
f3(x) | ABC | 189.997 | 5.919e+3 ± 4.890e+3 | 4.346e+5 | 186.093 |
fdABC | 538.976 | 0.00884 ± 0.00966 | 0.001 | 504.637 | |
RmdABC | 351.792 | 6.042937 ± 4.06785 | 1.430 | 337.071 | |
IMABC | 149.570532 | 0.00414 ± 0.00539 | 7.879e-05 | 128.478 | |
f4(x) | ABC | 192.425 | 0.585 ± 0.057 | 0.476 | 191.377 |
fdABC | 733.001 | 1.1493e-13 ± 3.910e-15 | 1.110e-13 | 721.068 | |
RmdABC | 376.785 | 0.006227 ± 0.00221 | 0.003694 | 372.387 | |
IMABC | 100.566 | 1.167e-13 ± 6.311e-15 | 1.110e-13 | 98.099 | |
f5(x) | ABC | 193.990 | 152.642 ± 8.074 | 193.287 | 193.2873 |
fdABC | 458.470157 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 452.713643 | |
RmdABC | 574.398 | 7.97e-4 ± 8.87e-4 | 8.599e-05 | 573.802 | |
IMABC | 93.270 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 92.877 | |
f6(x) | ABC | 189.754 | 78.395 ± 9.899 | 63.6545 | 187.726 |
fdABC | 637.867 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 622.008 | |
RmdABC | 289.625 | 1.379e-07 ± 1.368e-07 | 1.838e-08 | 287.601 | |
IMABC | 49.458 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 48.919 | |
f7(x) | ABC | 202.594 | 2.755e-08 ± 2.477e-08 | 6.526e-11 | 202.314 |
fdABC | 441.625 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 433.375 | |
RmdABC | 338.374 | 1.000e-06 ± 1.085e-06 | 8.739e-10 | 328.849 | |
IMABC | 152.650 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 148.707 | |
f8(x) | ABC | 205.3121 | 4.432e-05 ± 3.308e-05 | 2.5522e-06 | 204.430 |
fdABC | 444.093 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 440.009 | |
RmdABC | 332.326 | 2.141e-08 ± 4.487e-08 | 2.021e-11 | 330.175 | |
IMABC | 152.809 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 150.659 | |
f9(x) | ABC | 203.890 | 5.293 ± 0.181 | 4.981 | 203.639 |
fdABC | 406.710 | 1.1564e-13 ± 6.050e-15 | 1.039e-13 | 402.956 | |
RmdABC | 342.476 | 4.945e-04 ± 3.758e-04 | 2.069e-4 | 338.625 | |
IMABC | 77.486 | 0.012 ± 0.036 | 1.039e-13 | 72.511 |
For functions f3(x), f5(x), f6(x), f7(x) and f8(x), the values of all four indices in each dimension corresponding to IMABC are smallest, which means IMABC possesses the highest optimization accuracy, the fastest convergence speed as well as the best stability when solves the above functions. Another improved algorithm RmdABC gets smaller fitness values and Mean ± std dev values, but it takes longer time compared with the one of ABC. On the other hand, it improves the optimization efficiency of fdABC at the expense of a worse solution. In other words, RmdABC balances the exploration and exploitation abilities of fdABC and ABC.
In addition, IMABC obtains the lowest values of Mean ± std dev and Best-F, but it takes longer running time to obtain optimal solution than ABC algorithm for f2(x), which means that the stability and global search ability of IMABC are the best, while its convergence performance is better than fdABC and RmdABC because it updates less dimensions. Besides that, as the results of optimizing functions f1(x), f4(x) and f9(x), fdABC obtains the best fitness value as well as best stability among all algorithms as it executes full-dimensional search and IMABC takes much less time to get the optimal solution.
The curves of fitness values for functions f3(x) under different dimensions are depicted as Figures 4–6, and the same conclusions as mentioned above could be obtained.
From the analysis above, it can be seen that the proposed IMABC algorithm is able to produce better solutions with higher stability compared with ABC, and costs shorter computational time than other improved algorithms. RmdABC which is deduced from fdABC could reduce its time cost, but the quality of solution becomes poor because it updates less dimensions. Therefore, the proposed IMABC and RmdABC algorithms can balance exploration and exploitation abilities of ABC and fdABC.
The performance of proposed algorithms has been evaluated by solving complex mathematical problems above, and they will be applied to solve the scheduling problem in the container storage area of Luoyang Beijiao Airport in this section.
There are 16 entrances and exits in the container storage area of the airport station, the entrance coordinates are R1 (1-1-5), R2 (1-1-15), R3 (2-1-20), R4 (1-1-25), R5 (1-1-30), R6 (1-1-35), R7 (1-1-40), R8 (1-1-50) and R9 (1-1-60), and the exit coordinates are C1 (1-1-8), C2 (1-1-18), C3 (1-1-28), C4 (1-1-38), C5 (2-1-48), C6 (1-1-53) and C7 (1-1-58), where R3, C5 are I/O ports at the landside, and the rest are I/O ports at the airside. The first value in the bracket represents the row number of the shelf, the second value indicates the number of layer and the third value is the number of column. Table 7 depicts the assigned positions and current positions of 60 tasks needed to be scheduled, where the first 30 ones are input tasks, and the last 30 ones are output tasks.
Assigned position of inbound task | Assigned position of inbound task | Current position of outbound task | Current position of outbound task | ||||
1 | I(1-5-10) | 16 | I(1-8-44) | 31 | O(1-3-10) | 46 | O(2-8-10) |
2 | I(2-3-14) | 17 | I(2-8-32) | 32 | O(1-5-55) | 47 | O(1-3-32) |
3 | I(1-3-23) | 18 | I(2-3-54) | 33 | O(1-5-25) | 48 | O(1-4-50) |
4 | I(1-5-26) | 19 | I(1-3-40) | 34 | O(2-4-8) | 49 | O(2-3-38) |
5 | I(1-5-30) | 20 | I(1-4-60) | 35 | O(2-2-18) | 50 | O(2-1-58) |
6 | I(1-2-18) | 21 | I(1-3-20) | 36 | O(2-1-16) | 51 | O(1-5-24) |
7 | I(1-5-24) | 22 | I(2-2-43) | 37 | O(2-3-51) | 52 | O(1-4-30) |
8 | I(1-4-40) | 23 | I(2-4-50) | 38 | O(1-5-6) | 53 | O(2-6-40) |
9 | I(1-5-40) | 24 | I(1-6-10) | 39 | O(2-5-3) | 54 | O(2-4-35) |
10 | I(1-5-35) | 25 | I(2-7-20) | 40 | O(1-6-12) | 55 | O(2-8-51) |
11 | I(2-5-23) | 26 | I(1-6-15) | 41 | O(2-6-13) | 56 | O(2-2-30) |
12 | I(1-7-43) | 27 | I(2-8-30) | 42 | O(2-7-49) | 57 | O(1-2-60) |
13 | I(1-3-48) | 28 | I(2-2-45) | 43 | O(1-7-57) | 58 | O(1-3-26) |
14 | I(1-8-50) | 29 | I(1-7-58) | 44 | O(1-5-25) | 59 | O(1-6-35) |
15 | I(1-6-21) | 30 | I(1-4-9) | 45 | O(2-6-18) | 60 | O(2-8-45) |
For this constrained optimization problem as shown in Eqs (1) and (2), the solution is the sequence of inbound and outbound tasks with dual ETVs, which corresponds to the minimum total time cost as Eq (1). In other words, it is a discrete optimization problem, integer encoding scheme mentioned in [27] is introduced and random numbers between -10 and 10 are assigned to each dimension of the optimized solutions, after sorting them in ascending order based on their values, the corresponding scheduling scheme as well as the optimal solution could be obtained. Furthermore, the constraint conditions as Eq (2) should be checked for each obtained scheduling scheme in the iterative optimization procedure. If the constraints corresponding to the generated solution are satisfied, the solution will be saved and used for further exploration, otherwise a new solution needs to be introduced.
Comparative studies among four algorithms, including ABC, fdABC, RmdABC and IMABC, are executed for the above scheduling problem. The swarm size of all algorithms is set to 200 with 60 dimensions, the maximum local search time is 50, the stopping criterion is set to 1000 generations. Initial populations are generated through uniformly random sampling from the search space. Each algorithm is independently tested 20 times. The experiments are performed with an Intel Core i7-8750H CPU and 8GB of RAM.
Table 8 presents the optimization results (fitness value which is the scheduling time corresponding to the optimal solution) in the first ten trials. It can be seen that all proposed algorithms are able to produce high-quality solutions for scheduling problem, the performance of IMABC is better than RmdABC and ABC.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
ABC | 2783.30 | 2784.07 | 2793.17 | 2793.17 | 2801.13 | 2801.13 | 2789.08 | 2793.07 | 2793.17 | 2783.30 |
fdABC | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2631.32 | 2631.08 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 |
RmdABC | 2669.17 | 2664.82 | 2675.17 | 2654.29 | 2667.66 | 2660.38 | 2643.60 | 2646.47 | 2653.82 | 2653.82 |
IMABC | 2634.83 | 2634.20 | 2641.65 | 2639.56 | 2625.64 | 2630.45 | 2627.47 | 2624.59 | 2634.13 | 2629.54 |
Table 9 lists four important indices, they are the average time needed to execute the sequence corresponding to optimal solution in 20 trials (Avg), the fitness value of the best solution (Min), the fitness value of the worst solution (Max) and the corresponding running time (CPU time). It is clear that the last two proposed algorithms possess better performance as the first three indices decrease by 6% at most compared with ABC, but the time needed to obtain the optimal solution is longer. It means RmdABC and IMABC can keep the balance between the optimization accuracy and convergence speed compared with ABC. Moreover, because fdABC covers more dimensions than other mentioned algorithms, the fitness values are better than RmdABC, but the running time is 1.97 and 2.35 times of RmdABC and IMABC.
Min(s) | Max(s) | Avg(s) | CPU time (s) | |
ABC | 2783.299 | 2,801.132 | 2791.459 | 22,016.33881 |
fdABC | 2631.078 | 2632.564 | 2632.291 | 114,872.57987 |
RmdABC | 2643.596 | 2675.170 | 2658.920 | 58,699.41842 |
IMABC | 2624.589 | 2641.653 | 2632.203 | 48,795.48948 |
For the two proposed algorithms, the fitness value obtained by IMABC was a 1% reduction with respect to RmdABC and the searching time with IMABC is 83% of RmABC, obviously the optimization ability of IMABC is better than RmABC.
The conclusion also can be obtained from Figure 7 which depicts the average fitness values of the optimization problem, the curve slope of fitness values corresponding to the three improved algorithms is relatively steeper as compared with ABC, which proves their convergence. And the fitness values corresponding to IMABC converges at about 100 iterations, thus its ability of convergence could be proved.
Figure 8 and Table 10 show the corresponding trajectories of two ETVs and the sequence of task set optimized with IMABC algorithm respectively. It is clear that the dual ETVs could execute the scheduling tasks successfully without conflicting with each other.
Inbound tasks | Outbound tasks | ||
1 | 1, 24, 30 | 1 | 31, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 60 |
2 | 2, 26 | 2 | 35, 36, 45 |
3 | 6, 11, 15, 21, 25 | 3 | 33, 44, 47, 51, 52, 56, 58 |
4 | 3, 4, 7 | 4 | 49, 53, 54, 59 |
5 | 5, 17, 27 | 5 | 42, 48, 55 |
6 | 10 | 6 | 32, 37, 43 |
7 | 8, 9, 12, 16, 19, 22, 28 | 7 | 50, 57 |
8 | 13, 14, 18, 23 | ||
9 | 20, 29 |
From the above results, the following conclusions could be obtained:
1) IMABC are valid for solving the complex scheduling problem and they can improve the searching ability of traditional ABC algorithm.
2) fdABC possesses the excellent exploration ability, IMABC could keep the balance between the optimization accuracy and convergence speed compared with ABC and fdABC under this scheduling background.
3) For IMABC, with the help of the current optimal dimensions, the convergence speed could be improved compared with fdABC and RmdABC.
In this paper, in order to improve the efficiency in the container storage area of airport cargo terminal, a study on scheduling of cargoes sequence and the action of ETV with ABC algorithms was performed. The dual ETVs scheduling model was established which considered the assignment of I/O ports as well as the trajectory of two ETVs with the constraint of avoiding collisions, and improved IMABC algorithm was proposed to solve this scheduling problem more effective. The computational experiments were carried out and the results proved the proposed algorithm could effectively avoid conflicts and generate optimal scheduling sequences.
ABC and corresponding improved algorithms have been proved to be effective in solving the scheduling problem, but the time cost for obtaining the optimal solution is high because of the iterative calculations. Improving its efficiency with appropriate methods, such as parallelization, can make the algorithm more useful especially in the scheduling problems. In addition, how to choose appropriate control parameters for different optimization issues is a problem in ABC and improved algorithms as with other metaheuristic algorithms. This problem has not been investigated sufficiently in the literature. Therefore, designing a general principle for tuning the control parameters of ABC can be addressed as a searching subject in future studies.
This work was supported by International joint research center for logistics management and engineering in Zhongyuan University of Technology, as well as the High-end foreign expert program of Ministry of Science and Technology, grant number G2021026006L; the Training Program for Young Teachers in Universities of Henan Province, grant number 2020GGJS137; the NSFC-Zhejiang Joint Fund for the Integration of Industrialization and Informatization, grant number U1709215; the Zhejiang Province Key R & D projects, grant number No. 2019C03104; the Key Scientific Research Projects of Henan Province, grant number 22A413011; Henan Province Science and Technology R & D projects, grant number 202102210135, 212102310547 and 212102210080; National Nature Science Foundation of China, grant number U1813201, 72101033 and 71831001; Beijing Natural Science Foundation Project grant number KZ202210037046; Canal Plan-Youth Top-notch Talent Project of Beijing Tongzhou District, grant number YHQN2017014.
The authors declare there are no conflicts of interest.
[1] |
Kanzari F, Syakti AD, Asia L, et al. (2014) Distributions and sources of persistent organic pollutants (aliphatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs and pesticides) in surface sediments of an industrialized urban river (Huveaune), France. Sci Total Environ 478: 141-151. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.01.065
![]() |
[2] |
Abdel-Shafy HI, Mansour MSM (2016) A review on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: source, environmental impact, effect on human health and remediation. Egypt J Pet 25: 107-123. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpe.2015.03.011
![]() |
[3] |
Lin Y, Qiu X, Ma Y, et al. (2015) Concentrations and spatial distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and nitrated PAHs (NPAHs) in the atmosphere of North China, and the transformation from PAHs to NPAHs. Environ Pollut 196: 164-170. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2014.10.005
![]() |
[4] |
Friedman CL, Pierce JR, Selin NE (2014) Assessing the Influence of Secondary Organic versus Primary Carbonaceous Aerosols on Long-Range Atmospheric Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Transport. Environ Sci Technol 48: 3293-3302. doi: 10.1021/es405219r
![]() |
[5] |
Basavaiah N, Mohite RD, Singare PU, et al. (2017) Vertical distribution, composition profiles, sources and toxicity assessment of PAH residues in the reclaimed mudflat sediments from the adjacent Thane Creek of Mumbai. Mar Pollut Bull 118: 112-124. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.02.049
![]() |
[6] | Singare PU (2015) Studies on Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Sediments of Mithi River of Mumbai, India: Assessment of Sources, Toxicity Risk and Biological Impact. Mar Pollut Bull 101: 232-242. |
[7] |
Tongo I, Ezemonye L, Akpeh K (2017) Levels, distribution and characterization of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Ovia river, Southern Nigeria. J Environ Chem Eng 5: 504-512. doi: 10.1016/j.jece.2016.12.035
![]() |
[8] |
Hong WJ, Jia H, Li YF et al. (2016) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and alkylated PAHs in the coastal seawater, surface sediment and oyster from Dalian, Northeast China. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 128: 11-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2016.02.003
![]() |
[9] | Qin XB, Sun HW, Wang CP, et al. (2010) Impacts of crab bioturbation on the fate of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in sediment from the Beitang Estuary of Tianjin, China. Environ Toxicol Chem 29: 1248-1255. |
[10] |
Gu YG, Lin Q, Lu TT, et al. (2013) Levels, composition profiles and sources of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in surface sediments from Nan'ao Island, a representative mariculture base in South China. Mar Pollut Bull 75: 310-316. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.07.039
![]() |
[11] |
Hawliczek A, Nota B, Cenijn P, et al. (2012) Developmental toxicity and endocrine disrupting potency of 4-azapyrene, benzo[b]fluorene and retene in the zebrafish Danio rerio. Reprod Toxicol 33: 213-223. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2011.11.001
![]() |
[12] |
Liu LY, Wang JZ, Wei GL, et al. (2012) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in continental shelf sediment of China: implications for anthropogenic influences on coastal marine environment. Environ Pollut 167: 155-162. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2012.03.038
![]() |
[13] |
Lewis MA, Russel MJ (2015) Contaminant profiles for surface water, sediment, flora and fauna associated with the mangrove fringe along middle and lower eastern Tampa Bay. Mar Pollut Bull 95: 273-282. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2015.04.001
![]() |
[14] |
Santana JL, Massone CG, Valdes M, et al. (2015) Occurrence and source appraisal of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in surface waters of the Almendares River, Cuba. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 69: 143-152. doi: 10.1007/s00244-015-0136-9
![]() |
[15] |
Sarria-Villa R, Ocampo-Duque W, Paez M, et al. (2016) Presence of PAHs in water and sediments of the Colombian Cauca River during heavy rain episodes, and implications for risk assessment. Sci Total Environ 540: 455-465. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.07.020
![]() |
[16] |
Singare PU (2016) Carcinogenic and endocrine disrupting PAHs in the aquatic ecosystem of India. Environ Monit Assess 188: 1-25. doi: 10.1007/s10661-015-4999-z
![]() |
[17] |
Yan J, Liu J, Shi X, et al. (2016) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in water from three estuaries of China: distribution, seasonal variations and ecological risk assessment. Mar Pollut Bull 109: 471-479. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.05.025
![]() |
[18] |
Manoli E, Samara C, Konstantinou I, et al. (2000) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the bulk precipitation and surface waters of Northern Greece. Chemosphere 41: 1845-1855. doi: 10.1016/S0045-6535(00)00134-X
![]() |
[19] | Mane S, Sundaram S (2014) Studies on some aspects on the biology of green mussel Perna viridis (Linnaeus, 1758) from Versova creek, Mumbai, northwest coast of India. Int Res J Sci Eng 2: 47-50. |
[20] |
Shirke S, Pinto SM, Kushwaha VK, et al. (2016) Object-based image analysis for the impact of sewage pollution in Malad Creek, Mumbai, India. Environ Monit Assess 188: 95-99. doi: 10.1007/s10661-015-4981-9
![]() |
[21] |
Zeng EY, Yu CC, Tran K (1999) In situ measurements of chlorinated hydrocarbons in the water column off the Palos Verdes Peninsula, California. Environ Sci Technol 33: 392-398. doi: 10.1021/es980561e
![]() |
[22] | WHO (1998) Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality, 2nd edition. Addendum to Vol. 2 Health Criteria and Other Supporting Information. World Health Organization, Geneva, pp. 123-152. |
[23] |
Xiang N, Jiang C, Yang T, et al. (2018) Occurrence and distribution of Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in seawater, sediments and corals from Hainan Island, China. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 152: 8-15. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.01.006
![]() |
[24] |
Santos E, Souza MRR, Vilela Junior AR, et al. (2018) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) in superficial water from a tropical estuarine system: Distribution, seasonal variations, sources and ecological risk assessment. Mar Pollut Bull 127: 352-358. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.12.014
![]() |
[25] | Nwineewii JD, Marcus AC (2015) Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) In Surface Water and Their Toxicological Effects in Some Creeks of South East Rivers State (Niger Delta) Nigeria. IOSR J Environ Sci Toxicol Food Technol 9: 27-30. |
[26] |
Yang D, Qi SH, Zhang Y, et al. (2013) Levels, sources and potential risks of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in multimedia environment along the Jinjiang River mainstream to Quanzhou Bay, China. Mar Pollut Bull 76: 298-306. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.08.016
![]() |
[27] |
Adeniji AO, Okoh OO, Okoh AI (2019) Levels of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in the Water and Sediment of Bufalo River Estuary, South Africa and Their Health Risk Assessment. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 76: 657-669. doi: 10.1007/s00244-019-00617-w
![]() |
[28] |
Edokpayi JN, Odiyo JO, Popoola OE, et al. (2016) Determination and Distribution of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Rivers, Sediments and Wastewater Effluents in Vhembe District, South Africa. Int J Environ Res Public Health 13: 387, 1-12. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13040387
![]() |
[29] | Nekhavhambe TJ., van Ree T, Fatoki OS (2014) Determination and distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in rivers, surface runoff, and sediments in and around Thohoyandou, Limpopo Province, South Africa. Water SA 40: 415-424. |
[30] | Eganhouse RP, Simoneit BRT, Kaplan IR (1981) Extractable organic matter in urban stormwater runoff. 2. Molecular characterization. Environ Sci Technol 15: 315-326. |
[31] |
Hoffman EJ, Mills GL, Latimer JS, et al. (1984) Urban runoff as a source of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons to coastal waters. Environ Sci Technol 18: 580-587. doi: 10.1021/es00126a003
![]() |
[32] |
Agarwal T, Khillare P, Shridhar V, et al. (2009) Pattern, sources and toxic potential of PAHs in the agricultural soils of Delhi, India. J Hazard Mater 163: 1033-1039. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.058
![]() |
[33] |
Xing XL, Qi S, Zhang J, et al. (2011) Spatial distribution and source diagnosis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soils from Chengdu Economic Region, Sichuan Province, western China. J Geochem Explor 110: 146-154. doi: 10.1016/j.gexplo.2011.05.001
![]() |
[34] |
Sprovieri M, Feo ML, Prevedello L, et al. (2007) Heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and polychlorinated biphenyls in surface sediments of the Naples harbor (southern Italy). Chemosphere 67: 998-1009. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.10.055
![]() |
[35] |
Ravindra K, Wauters E, Grieken RV (2008) Variation in particulate PAHs levels and their relation with the transboundary movement of the air masses. Sci Total Environ 396: 100-110. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.02.018
![]() |
[36] |
Tobiszewski M, Namiesnik J (2012) PAH diagnostic ratios for the identification of pollution emission sources. Environ Pollut 162: 110-119. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2011.10.025
![]() |
[37] |
Cao ZH, Wang YQ, Ma YM, et al. (2005) Occurrence and distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in reclaimed water and surface water of Tianjin, China. J Hazard Mater 122: 51-59. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.04.003
![]() |
[38] |
Boonyatumanond R, Wattayakorn G, Togo A, et al. (2006) Distribution and origins of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in riverine, estuarine, and marine sediments in Thailand. Mar Pollut Bull52: 942-956. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.12.015
![]() |
[39] | Mostert MMR., Ayoko GA, Kokot S (2010) Application of chemometrics to analysis of soil pollutants. Trends Anal Chem 29: 430-435. |
[40] |
Mai BX, Qi SH, Zeng EY, et al. (2003) Distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the coastal region off Macao, China: assessment of input sources and transport pathways using compositional analysis. Environ Sci Technol 37: 4855-4863. doi: 10.1021/es034514k
![]() |
[41] |
Rocher V, Azimi S, Moilleron R, et al. (2004) Hydrocarbons and heavy metals in the different sewer deposits in the Le Marais' catchment (Paris, France): stocks, distributions and origins. Sci Total Environ 323: 107-122. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2003.10.010
![]() |
[42] |
Wang XC, Sun S, Ma HQ, et al. (2006) Sources and distribution of aliphatic and polyaromatic hydrocarbons in sediments of Jiaozhou Bay, Qingdao, China. Mar Pollut Bull 52: 129-138. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.08.010
![]() |
[43] |
Montuori P, Aurino S, Garzonio F, et al. (2016) Distribution, sources and ecological risk assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in water and sediments from Tiber River and estuary, Italy. Sci Total Environ 566-567: 1254-1267. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.05.183
![]() |
[44] |
Zhang W, Zhang S, Wan C, et al. (2008) Source diagnostics of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in urban road runoff, dust, rain and canopy throughfall. Environ Pollut 153: 594-601. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2007.09.004
![]() |
[45] |
Chung MK, Hu R, Cheung KC, et al. (2007) Pollutants in Hongkong soils: polycyclicaromatic hydrocarbons. Chemosphere 67: 464-473. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.09.062
![]() |
[46] |
Li G, Xia X, Yang Z, et al. (2006) Distribution and sources of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River, China. Environ Pollut 144: 985-993. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2006.01.047
![]() |
[47] |
De La Torre-Roche RJ, Lee WY, Campos-Diaz SI (2009) Soil-borne polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in El Paso, Texas: analysis of a potential problem in the United States/Mexico border region. J Hazard Mater 163: 946-958. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.089
![]() |
[48] |
Akyuz M, Cabuk H (2010) Gaseparticle partitioning and seasonal variation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the atmosphere of Zonguldak, Turkey. Sci Total Environ 408: 5550-5558. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.07.063
![]() |
[49] | Dhananjayan V, Muralidharan S, Peter VR (2012) Occurrence and distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in water and sediment collected along the Harbour Line, Mumbai, India. Int J Oceanogr Article ID 403615, 7. |
[50] |
Katsoyiannis A, Sweetman AJ, Jones KC (2011) PAH molecular diagnostic ratios applied to atmospheric sources: a critical evaluation using two Decades of source Inventory and air concentration data from the UK. Environ Sci Technol 45: 8897-8906. doi: 10.1021/es202277u
![]() |
[51] |
Pozo K, Perra G, Menchi V, et al. (2011) Levels and spatial distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in sediments from Lenga Estuary, central Chile. Mar Pollut Bull 62: 1572-1576. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.04.037
![]() |
[52] | Law RJ, Dawes VJ, Woodhead RJ, et al. (1997) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) in seawater around England and Wales. Mar Pollut Bull 34: 306-322. |
[53] |
Barron MG, Podrabsky T, Ogle S, et al. (1999) Are aromatic hydrocarbons the primary determinant of petroleum toxicity to aquatic organisms? Aquat Toxicol 46: 253-268. doi: 10.1016/S0166-445X(98)00127-1
![]() |
[54] | Agroudy NA, Soliman YA, Hamed MA, et al. (2017) Distribution of PAHs in Water, Sediments Samples of Suez Canal During 2011. J Aquat Pol Toxicol 1: 1-10. |
[55] | Pohl A, Kostecki M, Jureczko I, et al. (2018) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in water and bottom sediments of a shallow, lowland dammed reservoir (on the example of the reservoir Blachownia, South Poland). Arch Environ Prot 44: 10-23. |
[56] | US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), (2012) Regional screening levels for chemical contaminants at superfund sites. Regional screening table. User's guide. (Access date: November 2012). < http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/human/rb-concentration_table/usersguide.htm > . |
[57] | Di Toro DM, McGrath JA, Hansen DJ (2000) Technical basis for narcotic chemicals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon criteria. I. Water and tissue. Environ Toxicol Chem 19: 1951-1970. |
[58] |
Kalf DF, Crommentuijn T, van de Plassche EJ (1997) Environmental quality objectives for 10 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 36: 89-97. doi: 10.1006/eesa.1996.1495
![]() |
[59] | Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) (2010) Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines, Carcinogenic and Other Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)-Environmental and Human Health Effects. ISBN 978-1-896997-94-0 PDF. |
[60] |
Yang B, Xue N, Zhou L, et al. (2012) Risk assessment and sources of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in agricultural soils of Huanghuai plain, China. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 84: 304-310. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2012.07.027
![]() |
[61] | Omayma EA, Sawsan AM, El Nady MM (2016) Application of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in identification of organic pollution in seawater around Alexandria coastal area, Egypt. J Environ Life Sci 1: 39-55. |
[62] | Daisey JM, Leyko MA, Kneip TJ (1979) Source identification and allocation of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon compounds in the New York City aerosol: methods and applications. In: Jones, P.W., Leber, P. (Eds.), Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, pp. 201-215. |
[63] |
Harrison RM, Smith DJT, Luhana L (1996) Source apportionment of atmospheric polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons collected from an urban location in Birmingham, UK. Environ Sci Technol 30: 825-832. doi: 10.1021/es950252d
![]() |
[64] | Rogge WF, Hildemann LM, Mazurek MA, et al. (1993) Source of fine organic aerosol 2. Noncatalyst and catalyst-equipped automobiles and heavy-duty diesel trucks. Environ Sci Technol 27: 636-651. |
[65] |
Gschwend PM, Hites RA (1981) Fluxes of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons to marine and lacustrine sediments in the northeastern United States. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 45: 2359-2367. doi: 10.1016/0016-7037(81)90089-2
![]() |
[66] |
Mitra S, Bianchi TS, Mckee BA, et al. (2002) Black carbon from the Mississippi River: quantities, sources and potential implications for the global carbon cycle. Environ Sci Technol 36: 2296-2302. doi: 10.1021/es015834b
![]() |
[67] |
Masclet P, Bresson MA, Mouvier G (1987) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons emitted by power station, and influence of combustion conditions. Fuel 66: 556-562. doi: 10.1016/0016-2361(87)90163-3
![]() |
Indices | Description |
x | The horizontal direction |
y | The vertical direction |
c | The number of columns between two slots in the shelf |
l | The number of layers between two slots in the shelf |
i | Task number, i= 1, 2, ..., n |
j | Number of ETV, j= 1, 2 |
Parameters | Description |
Vx | the horizontal travelling speeds of ETV, Vx=120(m/min) |
Vy | the vertical travelling speeds of ETV, Vy=20(m/min) |
ax | the horizontal acceleration of ETV, ax=0.5(m/s2) |
ay | the vertical acceleration of ETV, ay=0.3(m/s2) |
Txa | the time needed to travel horizontally from static to the maximum speed and immediately decreases to 0, Txa=2×Vxax=8(s) |
Tya | the time needed to lift vertically from static to the maximum speed and immediately decreases to 0, Tya=2×Vyay=2.2(s) |
Dx | the total travelling distance needed to travel from static to the maximum speed or from maximum speed to 0, Dx=14×ax×Txa2=8(m) |
Dy | the total lifting distance needed to travel from static to the maximum speed or from maximum speed to 0, Dy=14×ay×Tya2=0.36(m) |
w | width of the storage location, w=3.75(m) |
h | height of the storage location, h=3.75(m) |
δ | the execution time for ETV to load or unload cargoes, δ= 25(s) |
Variables | Description |
Txc | the time needed to move between two positions whose interval is c in horizontal direction |
Tyl | the time taken to move between two positions whose interval is l in vertical direction |
Hio | for the i-th task, the running time needed for travelling from the current position to the nearest I/O port |
Hi1 | The time of the i-th task for travelling from the current position to the scheduled target. |
M1 | working area of 1# ETV, 1≤M1≤30 |
M2 | working area of 2# ETV, 31≤M2≤60 |
fitj | the total time of the j-th ETV needed to finish the scheduled task |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
1 | 0 | 5.47 | 7.74 | 9.62 | 11.50 | 13.37 |
2 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 13.37 |
3 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 |
4 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 |
5 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 |
Function expression | Searching space | Minimum value | Modality |
f1(x)=x21+106∑Di=2x2i | [−100,100] | 0 | Unimodal |
f2(x)=∑Di=1|xi|i+1 | [−100,100] | 0 | Unimodal |
f3(x)=∑D−1i=1(100(xi2−xi+1)2+(xi−1)2) | [−100,100] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f4(x)=−20exp(−0.2√1n∑ni=1x2i)−exp(1n∑ni=1cos(2πxi))+20+e | [−5,5] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f5(x)=∑ni=1[x2i−10cos(2πxi)+10] | [−500,500] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f6(x)=∑ni=1(|xi+0.5|)2 | [−100,100] | 0 | Unimodal |
f7(x)=∑Di=1(x2i−10cos(2πxi)+10) | [−5.12,5.12] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f8(x)=sin2(πw1)+∑D−1i=1(wi−1)2[1+10sin2(πwi+1)]+(wD−1)2[1+sin2(2πwD)] wi=1+xi−14,∀i=1,…,D |
[−10,10] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f9(x)=−20exp(−0.2√1D∑Di=1x2i)−exp(1D∑Di=1cos(2πxi))+20+e | [−32.768,32.768] | 0 | Multi-modal |
Aver-R(s) | Mean ± std dev | Best-F | Best-R(s) | ||
f1(x) | ABC | 111.849 | 2.320e+5 ± 4.515e+4 | 1.709e+5 | 111.4955 |
fdABC | 253.316 | 2.929e-252 ± 0 | 1.416e-252 | 251.577 | |
RmdABC | 188.172 | 1.654e-2 ± 1.433e-2 | 1.49e-4 | 179.199 | |
IMABC | 29.213 | 3.469e-159 ± 5.567e-159 | 1.6314e-160 | 28.702 | |
f2(x) | ABC | 121.258 | 3.024e+41 ± 6.658e+41 | 1.593e+36 | 120.909 |
fdABC | 676.282 | 8.680e-255 ± 0 | 7.047e-258 | 672.294 | |
RmdABC | 401.083 | 2.091e-42 ± 4.015e-42 | 6.660e-46 | 395.373 | |
IMABC | 229.23419 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 383.842 | |
f3(x) | ABC | 116.400 | 5490.448 ± 4756.626 | 4884.468 | 115.536 |
fdABC | 284.881 | 2.33e-3 ± 1.35e-3 | 1.27e-4 | 279.176 | |
RmdABC | 212.479 | 1.1359 ± 0.955 | 0.323 | 208.025 | |
IMABC | 79.286 | 0.0018 ± 0.0020 | 4.004e-05 | 78.222 | |
f4(x) | ABC | 122.561 | 0.0294 ± 0.0017 | 0.0266 | 121.327 |
fdABC | 266.4800 | 6.271e-14 ± 3.432e-15 | 5.773e-14 | 272.640 | |
RmdABC | 203.594 | 4.250e-06 ± 3.376e-06 | 1.808e-07 | 200.635 | |
IMABC | 58.415 | 6.306e-14 ± 3.837e-15 | 5.773e-14 | 55.179 | |
f5(x) | ABC | 121.356 | 198.642 ± 12.773 | 179.002 | 121.051 |
fdABC | 250.787 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 245.425 | |
RmdABC | 190.324 | 4.145e-06 ± 5.252e-06 | 2.271e-07 | 189.681 | |
IMABC | 52.091 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 51.353288 | |
f6(x) | ABC | 120.309 | 0.232 ± 0.029 | 0.177 | 119.949 |
fdABC | 224.032 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 218.470 | |
RmdABC | 178.819 | 1.262e-08 ± 1.059e-08 | 4.285e-10 | 178.200 | |
IMABC | 29.427 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 28.468 | |
f7(x) | ABC | 123.764 | 4.449e-09 ± 3.849e-09 | 5.566e-10 | 122.544 |
fdABC | 255.694 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 254.511 | |
RmdABC | 192.567 | 4.210e-08 ± 3.580e-08 | 4.677e-10 | 190.664 | |
IMABC | 84.560 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 82.977 | |
f8(x) | ABC | 127.611 | 1.354e-05 ± 1.623e-05 | 2.079e-07 | 126.884 |
fdABC | 256.347 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 254.650 | |
RmdABC | 194.270 | 8.781e-11 ± 2.043e-10 | 6.019e-15 | 192.641 | |
IMABC | 90.816 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 88.339 | |
f9(x) | ABC | 125.083 | 1.694 ± 0.0995 | 1.518 | 123.144 |
fdABC | 221.099 | 6.484e-14 ± 2.901e-15 | 5.773e-14 | 220.187 | |
RmdABC | 195.0828 | 1.738 ± 3.070 | 1.224e-05 | 188.5410 | |
IMABC | 35.2991 | 0.058 ± 0.183 | 5.773e-14 | 34.9160 |
Aver-R(s) | Mean ± std dev | Best-F | Best-R(s) | ||
f1(x) | ABC | 186.356 | 7.443e+7 ± 9.252e+6 | 6.612e+7 | 185.785 |
fdABC | 349.896 | 9.500e-252 ± 0 | 1.073e-251 | 341.500 | |
RmdABC | 254.843 | 1.830 ± 2.791 | 0.187 | 242.967 | |
IMABC | 37.905 | 2.141e-150 ± 2.160e-150 | 1.580e-151 | 37.526 | |
f2(x) | ABC | 161.169 | 7.666e+82 ± 2.424e+83 | 9.065e+73 | 157.306 |
fdABC | 1092.133 | 5.377e-250 ± 0 | 9.849e-253 | 1083.415 | |
RmdABC | 641.927 | 1.236e-18 ± 3.277e-18 | 4.733e-22 | 629.479 | |
IMABC | 385.096 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 383.842 | |
f3(x) | ABC | 153.868 | 65508.192 ± 5912.818 | 53885.588 | 152.849 |
fdABC | 408.311 | 0.00517 ± 0.00572 | 0.000291 | 393.921 | |
RmdABC | 297.845 | 2.626 ± 1.258 | 1.1049 | 287.474 | |
IMABC | 111.143 | 0.00295 ± 0.00379 | 2.251e-05 | 100.158 | |
f4(x) | ABC | 155.879 | 0.152 ± 0.00873 | 0.140 | 155.490 |
fdABC | 381.999 | 8.757e-14 ± 5.605e-15 | 7.905e-14 | 368.461 | |
RmdABC | 279.508 | 2.649e-05 ± 1.28648e-05 | 9.587e-06 | 275.084 | |
IMABC | 79.558 | 8.900e-14 ± 3.669e-15 | 8.615e-14 | 77.818 | |
f5(x) | ABC | 155.747 | 759.215 ± 50.780 | 687.486 | 153.785 |
fdABC | 351.982 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 346.306 | |
RmdABC | 275.060 | 0.0184 ± 0.0096 | 0.0056 | 270.149 | |
IMABC | 74.003 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 72.661 | |
f6(x) | ABC | 151.843 | 8.142 ± 0.982 | 6.349 | 151.444 |
fdABC | 300.048 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 297.340 | |
RmdABC | 537.590 | 6.049e-07 ± 6.005e-07 | 2.1807e-08 | 373.611 | |
IMABC | 56.487 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 53.586 | |
f7(x) | ABC | 162.425 | 6.674e-08 ± 8.736e-08 | 1.244e-09 | 161.965 |
fdABC | 344.317 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 341.703 | |
RmdABC | 266.554 | 3.471e-07 ± 5.419e-07 | 1.397e-08 | 260.925 | |
IMABC | 112.593 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 111.564 | |
f8(x) | ABC | 165.271 | 2.556e-05 ± 2.445e-05 | 9.431e-08 | 164.439 |
fdABC | 344.205 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 343.570 | |
RmdABC | 260.079 | 2.892e-10 ± 3.535e-10 | 1.326e-14 | 258.259 | |
IMABC | 121.254 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 119.521 | |
f9(x) | ABC | 162.977 | 3.614 ± 0.087 | 3.503 | 161.545 |
fdABC | 306.928 | 8.971e-14 ± 3.745e-15 | 8.615e-14 | 301.461 | |
RmdABC | 273.895 | 2.0297e-04 ± 1.3504e-04 | 9.416e-05 | 261.859 | |
IMABC | 56.5127 | 0.086 ± 0.272 | 7.905e-14 | 54.828 |
Aver-R(s) | Mean ± std dev | Best-F | Best-R(s) | ||
f1(x) | ABC | 223.196 | 3.787e+8 ± 3.315e+7 | 3.416e+8 | 222.774 |
fdABC | 425.692 | 2.044e-251 ± 0 | 1.091e-251 | 420.020 | |
RmdABC | 303.243 | 12.037 ± 13.399 | 0.405 | 300.169 | |
IMABC | 47.675 | 2.788e-144 ± 1.955e-144 | 6.548e-145 | 47.180 | |
f2(x) | ABC | 199.808 | 2.279e+120 ± 4.714e+120 | 7.215e+111 | 197.343 |
fdABC | 1664.371 | 1.671e-245 ± 0 | 6.863e-248 | 1619.398 | |
RmdABC | 920.823 | 3.470e-06 ± 9.807e-06 | 4.151e-09 | 911.149 | |
IMABC | 583.836 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 579.155 | |
f3(x) | ABC | 189.997 | 5.919e+3 ± 4.890e+3 | 4.346e+5 | 186.093 |
fdABC | 538.976 | 0.00884 ± 0.00966 | 0.001 | 504.637 | |
RmdABC | 351.792 | 6.042937 ± 4.06785 | 1.430 | 337.071 | |
IMABC | 149.570532 | 0.00414 ± 0.00539 | 7.879e-05 | 128.478 | |
f4(x) | ABC | 192.425 | 0.585 ± 0.057 | 0.476 | 191.377 |
fdABC | 733.001 | 1.1493e-13 ± 3.910e-15 | 1.110e-13 | 721.068 | |
RmdABC | 376.785 | 0.006227 ± 0.00221 | 0.003694 | 372.387 | |
IMABC | 100.566 | 1.167e-13 ± 6.311e-15 | 1.110e-13 | 98.099 | |
f5(x) | ABC | 193.990 | 152.642 ± 8.074 | 193.287 | 193.2873 |
fdABC | 458.470157 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 452.713643 | |
RmdABC | 574.398 | 7.97e-4 ± 8.87e-4 | 8.599e-05 | 573.802 | |
IMABC | 93.270 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 92.877 | |
f6(x) | ABC | 189.754 | 78.395 ± 9.899 | 63.6545 | 187.726 |
fdABC | 637.867 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 622.008 | |
RmdABC | 289.625 | 1.379e-07 ± 1.368e-07 | 1.838e-08 | 287.601 | |
IMABC | 49.458 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 48.919 | |
f7(x) | ABC | 202.594 | 2.755e-08 ± 2.477e-08 | 6.526e-11 | 202.314 |
fdABC | 441.625 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 433.375 | |
RmdABC | 338.374 | 1.000e-06 ± 1.085e-06 | 8.739e-10 | 328.849 | |
IMABC | 152.650 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 148.707 | |
f8(x) | ABC | 205.3121 | 4.432e-05 ± 3.308e-05 | 2.5522e-06 | 204.430 |
fdABC | 444.093 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 440.009 | |
RmdABC | 332.326 | 2.141e-08 ± 4.487e-08 | 2.021e-11 | 330.175 | |
IMABC | 152.809 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 150.659 | |
f9(x) | ABC | 203.890 | 5.293 ± 0.181 | 4.981 | 203.639 |
fdABC | 406.710 | 1.1564e-13 ± 6.050e-15 | 1.039e-13 | 402.956 | |
RmdABC | 342.476 | 4.945e-04 ± 3.758e-04 | 2.069e-4 | 338.625 | |
IMABC | 77.486 | 0.012 ± 0.036 | 1.039e-13 | 72.511 |
Assigned position of inbound task | Assigned position of inbound task | Current position of outbound task | Current position of outbound task | ||||
1 | I(1-5-10) | 16 | I(1-8-44) | 31 | O(1-3-10) | 46 | O(2-8-10) |
2 | I(2-3-14) | 17 | I(2-8-32) | 32 | O(1-5-55) | 47 | O(1-3-32) |
3 | I(1-3-23) | 18 | I(2-3-54) | 33 | O(1-5-25) | 48 | O(1-4-50) |
4 | I(1-5-26) | 19 | I(1-3-40) | 34 | O(2-4-8) | 49 | O(2-3-38) |
5 | I(1-5-30) | 20 | I(1-4-60) | 35 | O(2-2-18) | 50 | O(2-1-58) |
6 | I(1-2-18) | 21 | I(1-3-20) | 36 | O(2-1-16) | 51 | O(1-5-24) |
7 | I(1-5-24) | 22 | I(2-2-43) | 37 | O(2-3-51) | 52 | O(1-4-30) |
8 | I(1-4-40) | 23 | I(2-4-50) | 38 | O(1-5-6) | 53 | O(2-6-40) |
9 | I(1-5-40) | 24 | I(1-6-10) | 39 | O(2-5-3) | 54 | O(2-4-35) |
10 | I(1-5-35) | 25 | I(2-7-20) | 40 | O(1-6-12) | 55 | O(2-8-51) |
11 | I(2-5-23) | 26 | I(1-6-15) | 41 | O(2-6-13) | 56 | O(2-2-30) |
12 | I(1-7-43) | 27 | I(2-8-30) | 42 | O(2-7-49) | 57 | O(1-2-60) |
13 | I(1-3-48) | 28 | I(2-2-45) | 43 | O(1-7-57) | 58 | O(1-3-26) |
14 | I(1-8-50) | 29 | I(1-7-58) | 44 | O(1-5-25) | 59 | O(1-6-35) |
15 | I(1-6-21) | 30 | I(1-4-9) | 45 | O(2-6-18) | 60 | O(2-8-45) |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
ABC | 2783.30 | 2784.07 | 2793.17 | 2793.17 | 2801.13 | 2801.13 | 2789.08 | 2793.07 | 2793.17 | 2783.30 |
fdABC | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2631.32 | 2631.08 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 |
RmdABC | 2669.17 | 2664.82 | 2675.17 | 2654.29 | 2667.66 | 2660.38 | 2643.60 | 2646.47 | 2653.82 | 2653.82 |
IMABC | 2634.83 | 2634.20 | 2641.65 | 2639.56 | 2625.64 | 2630.45 | 2627.47 | 2624.59 | 2634.13 | 2629.54 |
Min(s) | Max(s) | Avg(s) | CPU time (s) | |
ABC | 2783.299 | 2,801.132 | 2791.459 | 22,016.33881 |
fdABC | 2631.078 | 2632.564 | 2632.291 | 114,872.57987 |
RmdABC | 2643.596 | 2675.170 | 2658.920 | 58,699.41842 |
IMABC | 2624.589 | 2641.653 | 2632.203 | 48,795.48948 |
Inbound tasks | Outbound tasks | ||
1 | 1, 24, 30 | 1 | 31, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 60 |
2 | 2, 26 | 2 | 35, 36, 45 |
3 | 6, 11, 15, 21, 25 | 3 | 33, 44, 47, 51, 52, 56, 58 |
4 | 3, 4, 7 | 4 | 49, 53, 54, 59 |
5 | 5, 17, 27 | 5 | 42, 48, 55 |
6 | 10 | 6 | 32, 37, 43 |
7 | 8, 9, 12, 16, 19, 22, 28 | 7 | 50, 57 |
8 | 13, 14, 18, 23 | ||
9 | 20, 29 |
Indices | Description |
x | The horizontal direction |
y | The vertical direction |
c | The number of columns between two slots in the shelf |
l | The number of layers between two slots in the shelf |
i | Task number, i= 1, 2, ..., n |
j | Number of ETV, j= 1, 2 |
Parameters | Description |
Vx | the horizontal travelling speeds of ETV, Vx=120(m/min) |
Vy | the vertical travelling speeds of ETV, Vy=20(m/min) |
ax | the horizontal acceleration of ETV, ax=0.5(m/s2) |
ay | the vertical acceleration of ETV, ay=0.3(m/s2) |
Txa | the time needed to travel horizontally from static to the maximum speed and immediately decreases to 0, Txa=2×Vxax=8(s) |
Tya | the time needed to lift vertically from static to the maximum speed and immediately decreases to 0, Tya=2×Vyay=2.2(s) |
Dx | the total travelling distance needed to travel from static to the maximum speed or from maximum speed to 0, Dx=14×ax×Txa2=8(m) |
Dy | the total lifting distance needed to travel from static to the maximum speed or from maximum speed to 0, Dy=14×ay×Tya2=0.36(m) |
w | width of the storage location, w=3.75(m) |
h | height of the storage location, h=3.75(m) |
δ | the execution time for ETV to load or unload cargoes, δ= 25(s) |
Variables | Description |
Txc | the time needed to move between two positions whose interval is c in horizontal direction |
Tyl | the time taken to move between two positions whose interval is l in vertical direction |
Hio | for the i-th task, the running time needed for travelling from the current position to the nearest I/O port |
Hi1 | The time of the i-th task for travelling from the current position to the scheduled target. |
M1 | working area of 1# ETV, 1≤M1≤30 |
M2 | working area of 2# ETV, 31≤M2≤60 |
fitj | the total time of the j-th ETV needed to finish the scheduled task |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
1 | 0 | 5.47 | 7.74 | 9.62 | 11.50 | 13.37 |
2 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 11.62 | 13.37 |
3 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 | 22.87 |
4 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 | 34.12 |
5 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 | 45.37 |
Function expression | Searching space | Minimum value | Modality |
f1(x)=x21+106∑Di=2x2i | [−100,100] | 0 | Unimodal |
f2(x)=∑Di=1|xi|i+1 | [−100,100] | 0 | Unimodal |
f3(x)=∑D−1i=1(100(xi2−xi+1)2+(xi−1)2) | [−100,100] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f4(x)=−20exp(−0.2√1n∑ni=1x2i)−exp(1n∑ni=1cos(2πxi))+20+e | [−5,5] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f5(x)=∑ni=1[x2i−10cos(2πxi)+10] | [−500,500] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f6(x)=∑ni=1(|xi+0.5|)2 | [−100,100] | 0 | Unimodal |
f7(x)=∑Di=1(x2i−10cos(2πxi)+10) | [−5.12,5.12] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f8(x)=sin2(πw1)+∑D−1i=1(wi−1)2[1+10sin2(πwi+1)]+(wD−1)2[1+sin2(2πwD)] wi=1+xi−14,∀i=1,…,D |
[−10,10] | 0 | Multi-modal |
f9(x)=−20exp(−0.2√1D∑Di=1x2i)−exp(1D∑Di=1cos(2πxi))+20+e | [−32.768,32.768] | 0 | Multi-modal |
Aver-R(s) | Mean ± std dev | Best-F | Best-R(s) | ||
f1(x) | ABC | 111.849 | 2.320e+5 ± 4.515e+4 | 1.709e+5 | 111.4955 |
fdABC | 253.316 | 2.929e-252 ± 0 | 1.416e-252 | 251.577 | |
RmdABC | 188.172 | 1.654e-2 ± 1.433e-2 | 1.49e-4 | 179.199 | |
IMABC | 29.213 | 3.469e-159 ± 5.567e-159 | 1.6314e-160 | 28.702 | |
f2(x) | ABC | 121.258 | 3.024e+41 ± 6.658e+41 | 1.593e+36 | 120.909 |
fdABC | 676.282 | 8.680e-255 ± 0 | 7.047e-258 | 672.294 | |
RmdABC | 401.083 | 2.091e-42 ± 4.015e-42 | 6.660e-46 | 395.373 | |
IMABC | 229.23419 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 383.842 | |
f3(x) | ABC | 116.400 | 5490.448 ± 4756.626 | 4884.468 | 115.536 |
fdABC | 284.881 | 2.33e-3 ± 1.35e-3 | 1.27e-4 | 279.176 | |
RmdABC | 212.479 | 1.1359 ± 0.955 | 0.323 | 208.025 | |
IMABC | 79.286 | 0.0018 ± 0.0020 | 4.004e-05 | 78.222 | |
f4(x) | ABC | 122.561 | 0.0294 ± 0.0017 | 0.0266 | 121.327 |
fdABC | 266.4800 | 6.271e-14 ± 3.432e-15 | 5.773e-14 | 272.640 | |
RmdABC | 203.594 | 4.250e-06 ± 3.376e-06 | 1.808e-07 | 200.635 | |
IMABC | 58.415 | 6.306e-14 ± 3.837e-15 | 5.773e-14 | 55.179 | |
f5(x) | ABC | 121.356 | 198.642 ± 12.773 | 179.002 | 121.051 |
fdABC | 250.787 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 245.425 | |
RmdABC | 190.324 | 4.145e-06 ± 5.252e-06 | 2.271e-07 | 189.681 | |
IMABC | 52.091 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 51.353288 | |
f6(x) | ABC | 120.309 | 0.232 ± 0.029 | 0.177 | 119.949 |
fdABC | 224.032 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 218.470 | |
RmdABC | 178.819 | 1.262e-08 ± 1.059e-08 | 4.285e-10 | 178.200 | |
IMABC | 29.427 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 28.468 | |
f7(x) | ABC | 123.764 | 4.449e-09 ± 3.849e-09 | 5.566e-10 | 122.544 |
fdABC | 255.694 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 254.511 | |
RmdABC | 192.567 | 4.210e-08 ± 3.580e-08 | 4.677e-10 | 190.664 | |
IMABC | 84.560 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 82.977 | |
f8(x) | ABC | 127.611 | 1.354e-05 ± 1.623e-05 | 2.079e-07 | 126.884 |
fdABC | 256.347 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 254.650 | |
RmdABC | 194.270 | 8.781e-11 ± 2.043e-10 | 6.019e-15 | 192.641 | |
IMABC | 90.816 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 88.339 | |
f9(x) | ABC | 125.083 | 1.694 ± 0.0995 | 1.518 | 123.144 |
fdABC | 221.099 | 6.484e-14 ± 2.901e-15 | 5.773e-14 | 220.187 | |
RmdABC | 195.0828 | 1.738 ± 3.070 | 1.224e-05 | 188.5410 | |
IMABC | 35.2991 | 0.058 ± 0.183 | 5.773e-14 | 34.9160 |
Aver-R(s) | Mean ± std dev | Best-F | Best-R(s) | ||
f1(x) | ABC | 186.356 | 7.443e+7 ± 9.252e+6 | 6.612e+7 | 185.785 |
fdABC | 349.896 | 9.500e-252 ± 0 | 1.073e-251 | 341.500 | |
RmdABC | 254.843 | 1.830 ± 2.791 | 0.187 | 242.967 | |
IMABC | 37.905 | 2.141e-150 ± 2.160e-150 | 1.580e-151 | 37.526 | |
f2(x) | ABC | 161.169 | 7.666e+82 ± 2.424e+83 | 9.065e+73 | 157.306 |
fdABC | 1092.133 | 5.377e-250 ± 0 | 9.849e-253 | 1083.415 | |
RmdABC | 641.927 | 1.236e-18 ± 3.277e-18 | 4.733e-22 | 629.479 | |
IMABC | 385.096 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 383.842 | |
f3(x) | ABC | 153.868 | 65508.192 ± 5912.818 | 53885.588 | 152.849 |
fdABC | 408.311 | 0.00517 ± 0.00572 | 0.000291 | 393.921 | |
RmdABC | 297.845 | 2.626 ± 1.258 | 1.1049 | 287.474 | |
IMABC | 111.143 | 0.00295 ± 0.00379 | 2.251e-05 | 100.158 | |
f4(x) | ABC | 155.879 | 0.152 ± 0.00873 | 0.140 | 155.490 |
fdABC | 381.999 | 8.757e-14 ± 5.605e-15 | 7.905e-14 | 368.461 | |
RmdABC | 279.508 | 2.649e-05 ± 1.28648e-05 | 9.587e-06 | 275.084 | |
IMABC | 79.558 | 8.900e-14 ± 3.669e-15 | 8.615e-14 | 77.818 | |
f5(x) | ABC | 155.747 | 759.215 ± 50.780 | 687.486 | 153.785 |
fdABC | 351.982 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 346.306 | |
RmdABC | 275.060 | 0.0184 ± 0.0096 | 0.0056 | 270.149 | |
IMABC | 74.003 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 72.661 | |
f6(x) | ABC | 151.843 | 8.142 ± 0.982 | 6.349 | 151.444 |
fdABC | 300.048 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 297.340 | |
RmdABC | 537.590 | 6.049e-07 ± 6.005e-07 | 2.1807e-08 | 373.611 | |
IMABC | 56.487 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 53.586 | |
f7(x) | ABC | 162.425 | 6.674e-08 ± 8.736e-08 | 1.244e-09 | 161.965 |
fdABC | 344.317 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 341.703 | |
RmdABC | 266.554 | 3.471e-07 ± 5.419e-07 | 1.397e-08 | 260.925 | |
IMABC | 112.593 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 111.564 | |
f8(x) | ABC | 165.271 | 2.556e-05 ± 2.445e-05 | 9.431e-08 | 164.439 |
fdABC | 344.205 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 343.570 | |
RmdABC | 260.079 | 2.892e-10 ± 3.535e-10 | 1.326e-14 | 258.259 | |
IMABC | 121.254 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 119.521 | |
f9(x) | ABC | 162.977 | 3.614 ± 0.087 | 3.503 | 161.545 |
fdABC | 306.928 | 8.971e-14 ± 3.745e-15 | 8.615e-14 | 301.461 | |
RmdABC | 273.895 | 2.0297e-04 ± 1.3504e-04 | 9.416e-05 | 261.859 | |
IMABC | 56.5127 | 0.086 ± 0.272 | 7.905e-14 | 54.828 |
Aver-R(s) | Mean ± std dev | Best-F | Best-R(s) | ||
f1(x) | ABC | 223.196 | 3.787e+8 ± 3.315e+7 | 3.416e+8 | 222.774 |
fdABC | 425.692 | 2.044e-251 ± 0 | 1.091e-251 | 420.020 | |
RmdABC | 303.243 | 12.037 ± 13.399 | 0.405 | 300.169 | |
IMABC | 47.675 | 2.788e-144 ± 1.955e-144 | 6.548e-145 | 47.180 | |
f2(x) | ABC | 199.808 | 2.279e+120 ± 4.714e+120 | 7.215e+111 | 197.343 |
fdABC | 1664.371 | 1.671e-245 ± 0 | 6.863e-248 | 1619.398 | |
RmdABC | 920.823 | 3.470e-06 ± 9.807e-06 | 4.151e-09 | 911.149 | |
IMABC | 583.836 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 579.155 | |
f3(x) | ABC | 189.997 | 5.919e+3 ± 4.890e+3 | 4.346e+5 | 186.093 |
fdABC | 538.976 | 0.00884 ± 0.00966 | 0.001 | 504.637 | |
RmdABC | 351.792 | 6.042937 ± 4.06785 | 1.430 | 337.071 | |
IMABC | 149.570532 | 0.00414 ± 0.00539 | 7.879e-05 | 128.478 | |
f4(x) | ABC | 192.425 | 0.585 ± 0.057 | 0.476 | 191.377 |
fdABC | 733.001 | 1.1493e-13 ± 3.910e-15 | 1.110e-13 | 721.068 | |
RmdABC | 376.785 | 0.006227 ± 0.00221 | 0.003694 | 372.387 | |
IMABC | 100.566 | 1.167e-13 ± 6.311e-15 | 1.110e-13 | 98.099 | |
f5(x) | ABC | 193.990 | 152.642 ± 8.074 | 193.287 | 193.2873 |
fdABC | 458.470157 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 452.713643 | |
RmdABC | 574.398 | 7.97e-4 ± 8.87e-4 | 8.599e-05 | 573.802 | |
IMABC | 93.270 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 92.877 | |
f6(x) | ABC | 189.754 | 78.395 ± 9.899 | 63.6545 | 187.726 |
fdABC | 637.867 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 622.008 | |
RmdABC | 289.625 | 1.379e-07 ± 1.368e-07 | 1.838e-08 | 287.601 | |
IMABC | 49.458 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 48.919 | |
f7(x) | ABC | 202.594 | 2.755e-08 ± 2.477e-08 | 6.526e-11 | 202.314 |
fdABC | 441.625 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 433.375 | |
RmdABC | 338.374 | 1.000e-06 ± 1.085e-06 | 8.739e-10 | 328.849 | |
IMABC | 152.650 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 148.707 | |
f8(x) | ABC | 205.3121 | 4.432e-05 ± 3.308e-05 | 2.5522e-06 | 204.430 |
fdABC | 444.093 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 440.009 | |
RmdABC | 332.326 | 2.141e-08 ± 4.487e-08 | 2.021e-11 | 330.175 | |
IMABC | 152.809 | 0 ± 0 | 0 | 150.659 | |
f9(x) | ABC | 203.890 | 5.293 ± 0.181 | 4.981 | 203.639 |
fdABC | 406.710 | 1.1564e-13 ± 6.050e-15 | 1.039e-13 | 402.956 | |
RmdABC | 342.476 | 4.945e-04 ± 3.758e-04 | 2.069e-4 | 338.625 | |
IMABC | 77.486 | 0.012 ± 0.036 | 1.039e-13 | 72.511 |
Assigned position of inbound task | Assigned position of inbound task | Current position of outbound task | Current position of outbound task | ||||
1 | I(1-5-10) | 16 | I(1-8-44) | 31 | O(1-3-10) | 46 | O(2-8-10) |
2 | I(2-3-14) | 17 | I(2-8-32) | 32 | O(1-5-55) | 47 | O(1-3-32) |
3 | I(1-3-23) | 18 | I(2-3-54) | 33 | O(1-5-25) | 48 | O(1-4-50) |
4 | I(1-5-26) | 19 | I(1-3-40) | 34 | O(2-4-8) | 49 | O(2-3-38) |
5 | I(1-5-30) | 20 | I(1-4-60) | 35 | O(2-2-18) | 50 | O(2-1-58) |
6 | I(1-2-18) | 21 | I(1-3-20) | 36 | O(2-1-16) | 51 | O(1-5-24) |
7 | I(1-5-24) | 22 | I(2-2-43) | 37 | O(2-3-51) | 52 | O(1-4-30) |
8 | I(1-4-40) | 23 | I(2-4-50) | 38 | O(1-5-6) | 53 | O(2-6-40) |
9 | I(1-5-40) | 24 | I(1-6-10) | 39 | O(2-5-3) | 54 | O(2-4-35) |
10 | I(1-5-35) | 25 | I(2-7-20) | 40 | O(1-6-12) | 55 | O(2-8-51) |
11 | I(2-5-23) | 26 | I(1-6-15) | 41 | O(2-6-13) | 56 | O(2-2-30) |
12 | I(1-7-43) | 27 | I(2-8-30) | 42 | O(2-7-49) | 57 | O(1-2-60) |
13 | I(1-3-48) | 28 | I(2-2-45) | 43 | O(1-7-57) | 58 | O(1-3-26) |
14 | I(1-8-50) | 29 | I(1-7-58) | 44 | O(1-5-25) | 59 | O(1-6-35) |
15 | I(1-6-21) | 30 | I(1-4-9) | 45 | O(2-6-18) | 60 | O(2-8-45) |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
ABC | 2783.30 | 2784.07 | 2793.17 | 2793.17 | 2801.13 | 2801.13 | 2789.08 | 2793.07 | 2793.17 | 2783.30 |
fdABC | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2631.32 | 2631.08 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 | 2632.56 |
RmdABC | 2669.17 | 2664.82 | 2675.17 | 2654.29 | 2667.66 | 2660.38 | 2643.60 | 2646.47 | 2653.82 | 2653.82 |
IMABC | 2634.83 | 2634.20 | 2641.65 | 2639.56 | 2625.64 | 2630.45 | 2627.47 | 2624.59 | 2634.13 | 2629.54 |
Min(s) | Max(s) | Avg(s) | CPU time (s) | |
ABC | 2783.299 | 2,801.132 | 2791.459 | 22,016.33881 |
fdABC | 2631.078 | 2632.564 | 2632.291 | 114,872.57987 |
RmdABC | 2643.596 | 2675.170 | 2658.920 | 58,699.41842 |
IMABC | 2624.589 | 2641.653 | 2632.203 | 48,795.48948 |
Inbound tasks | Outbound tasks | ||
1 | 1, 24, 30 | 1 | 31, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 60 |
2 | 2, 26 | 2 | 35, 36, 45 |
3 | 6, 11, 15, 21, 25 | 3 | 33, 44, 47, 51, 52, 56, 58 |
4 | 3, 4, 7 | 4 | 49, 53, 54, 59 |
5 | 5, 17, 27 | 5 | 42, 48, 55 |
6 | 10 | 6 | 32, 37, 43 |
7 | 8, 9, 12, 16, 19, 22, 28 | 7 | 50, 57 |
8 | 13, 14, 18, 23 | ||
9 | 20, 29 |