Upload
theodore-warner
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Wan-Yu Liu
Aletheia University
New Taipei City, Taiwan
1
A Cultural Algorithm forSpatial Forest Resource
Planning
Chun-Cheng Lin
National Chiao Tung University
Hsinchu, Taiwan
Spatial Forest Resource Planning Forests play many roles
Production + Protection + Recreation
Forest resource planning Impact on water pollution, erosion,
landscape aesthetics, and biodiversity
Spatial forest resource planning Clearcutting of one forestland
may expose neighboring forestland to wind damage, bark injuries, drainage problems, and site class deterioration.
The spatial constraints on minimum adjacency green-up age are imposed upon harvesting activities onadjacent forest stands of harvest units.
2
3
Spatial Forest Resource Planning Problem
Plan a harvest schedule of the forestland Harvest forest polygons at different time periods
Maximize the total harvested volumeover the planning harvest schedule
Under three spatial constraints The minimum harvest age constraint
The minimum adjacency green-up age constraint
The even flow constraint
1
2
6
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
2-dementional
plane
1
2
8adjacency relation
age
harvested age
13 polygons
Three Constraints
The minimum harvest age constraint Harvest the polygons at age a minimum age threshold
The even flow constraint To balance the harvest volume of each period,
enforce the timber volume for each periodto be harvested as even as possible
The minimum adjacency green-up age constraint The harvest should be dispersed
for wildlife reasons
A forest polygon must be recovered before an adjacent unit is harvested.
4
Related Works on this topic
A variety of approaches todifferent spatial forest resource planning problems
Multiple solution harvest scheduling [Van Deusen, 1999]
A mixed-integer formulation of the minimum patch size problem[McDill, 2003]
Using dynamic programming and overlapping subproblems to address adjacency in large harvest scheduling problems.[Hoganson, 1998]
Harvest scheduling with adjacency constraints: A simulated annealing approach. [Lockwood,1993]
Analyzing cliques for imposing adjacency restrictions in forest models (tabu search) [A. Murray, 1999]
Optimisation algorithms for spatially constrained forest planning (evolutionary program) [G. Liu, 2006]
5
Evolutionary Computation for Spatial Forest Planning [Liu et al., 2006]
Propose two approaches The evolutionary program (EP) approach
The simulated annealing (SA) approach
The EP approach is complicatedbut worse than the SA
approach
Objective of our work Propose a cultural algorithm (CA) approach,
which is a type of EP
Our CA' performance is better than the previous SA approach
6
Cultural Algorithm (CA)
Cultural algorithm (CA)is a class of evolutionary programbased on some theories from sociology and archaeologythat try to formulate cultural evolution.
7
beliefs
population
variation
acceptance influence
adjust
selectionperformancefunction
two spaces of a cultural algorithm
population space
belief space
normative matrixleader
selection performancefunction
crossover, repairing, exploration (interchange, sequencing, simple mutation), balancing
accept the bestindividual
accept those individualswith fitness > ave. fitness
normativeinfluence
Our CA approach
8
situationalinfluence
9
Population space
A number of individuals (candidate solutions) 13 forestland polygons 3 partitions + 1 residual
1
2
6
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Partition 2 Partition 3Partition 1 Residual
x1 x2 x3 x4 x5x6 x7 x8 x9 x10 x11
x12 x13
belief space
normative matrixleader
selection performancefunction
crossover, repairing, exploration (interchange, sequencing, simple mutation), balancing
accept the bestindividual
accept those individualswith fitness > ave. fitness
normativeinfluence
situationalinfluence
population space
as even as possible violated polygonsHarvested atthe 1st period
fitness= total harvested volume
Operators on the Population Space
Selection Chosen for reproduction by the roulette-wheel selection
Crossover and repairing
Balancing Make the volume harvested at each period as even as
possible10
belief space
normative matrixleader
selection performancefunction
crossover, repairing, exploration (interchange, sequencing, simple mutation), balancing
accept the bestindividual
accept those individualswith fitness > ave. fitness
normativeinfluence
situationalinfluence
population space
Partition i
Partition i
x1x10 x3 x9
x3x7 x10 x4
x12
crossover
repairing
Residual
x5
violate the adjacencyconstraint
3 Exploration Operators on Population Space
11
xk
Partition i
Partition i
swap two genes respectively fromtwo different time partitions
Partition j
swap the two partitions
Sequencing operator
Interchange operator
Simple mutation operator
Partition i Partition j
move a gene to another partition
xj
xj
Partition j
Acceptance Criteria
Original individual fitness = E1
New individual fitness E2
Accepted if
Otherwise, accepted with the following probability:
where
N is the iteration number;
;
;
is the maximum iteration number;
is the convergence control parameter.
12
Update of the Belief Space
13
belief space
normative matrixleader
selection performancefunction
crossover, repairing, exploration (interchange, sequencing, simple mutation), balancing
accept the bestindividual
accept those individualswith fitness > ave. fitness
normativeinfluence
situationalinfluence
population space
Situational Influence
14
xj
Partition i
xj
Partition i
leader
the concernedindividual
move gene xj to partition i
belief space
normative matrixleader
selection performancefunction
crossover, repairing, exploration (interchange, sequencing, simple mutation), balancing
accept the bestindividual
accept those individualswith fitness > ave. fitness
normativeinfluence
situationalinfluence
population space
Normative influence
Use the roulette-wheel rulefor the mutation operator with normative influence. gi = the gene in partition i with the maximal frequency f(gi) for all the
individuals in the belief space.
The ratio of gi in the roulette wheel is .
If an individual selects gene gx,the individual adds gene gx in partition x.
15
belief space
normative matrixleader
selection performancefunction
crossover, repairing, exploration (interchange, sequencing, simple mutation), balancing
accept the bestindividual
accept those individualswith fitness > ave. fitness
normativeinfluence
situationalinfluence
population space
gi
Partition i
gi
Partition i
Belief #1
Belief #2
Partition i
Belief #3
frequency f(gi) = 2
Experimental Data
An artificial problem instance. (a) A grid graph.
(b) Randomly remove 20 vertices from (a).
(c) Randomly shrink 80 edges in (b).
16
Experimental Results
17
18
Conclusion
This paper develops a cultural algorithm (CA)for a spatial forest resource planning problemunder three constraints
Simulation shows thatour proposed CAperforms better thanthe previous simulated annealing (SA) approach .
One of our most important contributions is thatour CA can be viewedan improved version of evolutionary programthat outperforms the previous SA approach.
19
Thank you for your attention!