Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Decentralized multi-level uncapacitated lot-sizing by automated negotiation

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
4OR Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An automated negotiation mechanism for decentralized production coordination is presented and evaluated. The coordination problem contains a set of self-interested software agents, representing the production facilities of a supply chain, searching for a mutually agreeable production plan, while taking private information into account. The negotiation mechanism is applied and evaluated using a multi-facility production coordination problem, which is a reformulation of the well-known multi-level uncapacitated lot-sizing problem (MLULSP). The basic element of the mechanism is a decentralized simulated annealing method, consisting of a transition rule carried out by a neutral mediator agent and a cooperative acceptance rule carried out by negotiating agents. We use 176 benchmark problems from relevant literature for the evaluation. Experimental results show that the proposed negotiation mechanism comes close to those results which are obtained by centralized planning. Furthermore, the developed simulated annealing method applied in a single, centralized planning task is competitive with the best known solution methods for the MLULSP. It was possible to compute new best solutions for 24 of the benchmark problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aarts E, Korst J (1989) Simulated annealing and Boltzmann machines: a stochastic approach to combinatorial optimization and neural computing. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Afentakis P, Gavish B (1986) Optimal lot-sizing algorithms for complex product structures. Oper Res 34(2): 237–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Afentakis P, Gavish B, Karmarkar US (1984) Computationally efficient optimal solutions to the lot-sizing problem in multistage assembly systems. Manage Sci 30(2): 222–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agnetis A, Mirchandani PB, Pacciarelli D, Pacifici A (2004) Scheduling problems with two competing agents. Eur J Oper Res 52(2): 229–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Albrecht M, Püttmann C, Scheckenbach B, Stadtler H, Braun H (2006) Recommendation for collaborative planning interface for service SC at the master planning level of an APS. Report 2.5, RWTH Aachen University. http://www.fir.rwth-aachen.de/projektseiten/incoco/files/DL_2_5.pdf. Accessed 28 Oct 2008

  • Arkin E, Joneja D, Roundy R (1989) Computational complexity of uncapacitated multi-echelon production planning problems. Oper Res Lett 8(2): 61–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benton WC, Srivastava R (1985) Product structure complexity and multilevel lot sizing using alternative costing policies. Decis Sci 16(4): 357–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bichler M, Kersten GE, Strecker S (2003) Towards a structured design of electronic negotiations. Group Decis Negot 12(4): 311–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bookbinder JH, Koch LA (1990) Production planning for mixed assembly/arborescent systems. J Oper Manage 9(1): 7–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cachon GP, Larivière M (2005) Supply chain coordination with revenue-sharing contracts: strengths and limitations. Manage Sci 51(1): 30–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Černý V (1985) Thermodynamical approach to the traveling salesman problem: an efficient simulation algorithm. J Optim Theor Appl 45(1): 41–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christopher M (1998) Logistics and supply chain management—strategies for reducing cost and improving service, 2nd edn. Financial Times/Pitman, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Chu C-L, Leon VJ (2008) Single-vendor multi-buyer inventory coordination under private information. Eur J Oper Res 191(2): 484–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clearwater SH (1996) Market-based control: a paradigm for distributed resource allocation. World Scientific, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman BJ, McKnew MA (1991) An improved heuristic for multilevel lot sizing in material requirements planning. Decis Sci 22(1): 136–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dellaert NP, Jeunet J (2000) Solving large unconstrained multilevel lot-sizing problems using a hybrid genetic algorithm. Int J Prod Res 38(5): 1083–1099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dellaert NP, Jeunet J (2003) Randomized multi-level lot-sizing heuristics for general product structures. Eur J Oper Res 148(1): 211–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dudek G (2004) Collaborative planning in supply chains: a negotiation-based approach. Lect Notes Econ Math Syst, vol 533. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Dudek G, Stadtler H (2005) Negotiation-based collaborative planning between supply chains partners. Eur J Oper Res 163(3): 668–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dudek G, Stadtler H (2007) Negotiation-based collaborative planning in divergent two-tier supply chains. Int J Prod Res 45(2): 465–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertogral K, Wu SD (2000) Auction-theoretic coordination of production planning in the supply chain. IIE Trans 32(10): 931–940

    Google Scholar 

  • Fandel G, Stammen-Hegener C (2006) Simultaneous lot sizing and scheduling for multi-product multi-level production. Int J Prod Econ 104(2): 308–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fink A (2004) Supply chain coordination by means of automated negotiations. In: Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Hawaii CD-ROM, p 10

  • Fink A (2006) Supply chain coordination by means of automated negotiation between autonomous agents. In: Chaib-draa B, Müller J (eds) Multiagent based supply chain management. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 28. Springer, Berlin, pp 351–372

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fink A (2007) Barwertorientierte Projektplanung mit mehreren Akteuren mittels eines verhandlungsbasierten Koordinationsmechanismus. In: Oberweis A, Weinhardt C, Gimpel H, Koschmider A, Pankratius V, Schnizler B (eds) eOrganisation: service-, prozess-, market-engineering, vol 2. Universitätsverlag, Karlsruhe, pp 465–482

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujita K, Ito T, Hattori H, Klein M (2008) An approach to implementing a threshold adjusting mechanism in very complex negotiations: a preliminary result. Stud Comp Intell, vol 110. Springer, Berlin, pp 127–141

  • Gjerdrum J, Shah N, Papageorgiou LG (2001) Transfer prices for multienterprise supply chain optimization. Ind Eng Chem Res 40(7): 1650–1660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homberger J (2008) A parallel genetic algorithm for the multi-level unconstrained lot-sizing problem. INFORMS J Comput 20(1): 124–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homberger J (2009) Decentralized multi-level unconstrained lot-sizing. http://www.dmlulsp.com/. Accessed 22 Jan 2009

  • Homberger J, Gehring H (2009) An ant colony optimization approach for the multi-level unconstrained lot-sizing problem. In: Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Hawaii, CD-ROM, p 7

  • Ito T, Klein M, Hattori H (2007) Multi-issue negotiation protocol for agents: exploring nonlinear utility spaces. In: Proceedings of the 20th international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Hyderabad, India, pp 1347–1352

  • Jennings NR, Faratin P, Lomuscio AR, Parsons S, Woolridge M, Sierra C (2001) Automated negotiation: prospects, methods and challenges. Group Decis Negot 10(2): 199–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings NR, Parsons S, Sierra C, Faratin P (2000) Automated negotiation. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on the practical application of intelligent agents and multi-agent systems, Manchester, UK, pp 23–30

  • Jennings NR, Wooldridge M (1995) Applying agent technology. Appl Artif Intell 9(4): 357–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones GT (2006) Hybrid computational models for the mediated negotiation of complex contracts. In: Proceedings of the 14th annual conference of the North American association for computational social and organization science, Notre Dame, Indiana. http://law.gsu.edu/gjones/pdfs/NAACSOS%20Complex%20Contracts.pdf. Accessed 22 Jan 2009

  • Jonker CM, Robu V (2004) Automated multi-attribute negotiation with efficient use of incomplete preference information. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems, vol 3, New York, pp 1054–1061

  • Jung H, Chen FF, Jeong B (2005) A production-distribution coordinating model for third party logistics partnership. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE international conference on automation science and engineering, Edmonton, Canada, pp 99–104

  • Kersten GE (2003) The science and engineering of e-negotiation: an introduction. In: Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii international conference on systems sciences, Hawaii, CD ROM, p 10

  • Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt CD Jr, Vecchi MP (1983) Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220(4598): 671–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein M, Faratin P, Bar-Yam Y (2002) Using an annealing mediator to solve the prisoners’ dilemma in the negotiation of complex contracts source. In: Padget J, Shehory O, Parkes D, Sadeh N, Walsh WE (eds) Agent-mediated electronic commerce IV. Lecture notes on artificial intelligence, vol 2531. Springer, Berlin, pp 194–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein M, Faratin P, Sayama H, Bar-Yam Y (2003a) Negotiating complex contracts. Group Decis Negot 12(2): 111–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein M, Faratin P, Sayama H, Bar-Yam Y (2003b) Protocols for negotiating complex contracts. IEEE Intell Syst 18(6): 32–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein M, Faratin P, Sayama H, Bar-Yam Y (2003c) Negotiation algorithms for collaborative design settings. In: Proceedings of the 10th ISPE international conference on concurrent engineering research and applications, Madeira, pp 161–167

  • Kuik R, Salomon M (1990) Multi-level lot-sizing problem: evaluation of a simulated-annealing heuristic. Eur J Oper Res 45(1): 25–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Laarhoven PMJ, Aarts EHL (1987) Simulated annealing: theory and applications. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau JSK, Huang GQ, Mak KL, Liang L (2005) Distributed project scheduling with information sharing in supply chains: part II–theoretical analysis and computational study. Int J Prod Res 43(23): 4899–4927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lomuscio AR, Wooldridge M, Jennings NR (2003) A classification scheme for negotiation in electronic commerce. Group Decis Negot 12(1): 31–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitakaso R, Almeder C, Doerner KF, Hartl RF (2007) A MAX–MIN ant system for unconstrained multi-level lot-sizing problems. Comput Oper Res 34(9): 2533–2552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon M, Kuik R (1993) Statistical search methods for lotsizing problems. Ann Oper Res 41(1–4): 453–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandholm T (2003) Automated mechanism design: a new application area for search algorithms. In: Proceedings of the international conference on principles and practice of constraint programming, Kinsale, Ireland, pp 19–32

  • Steinberg E, Napier HA (1980) Optimal multi-level lot sizing for requirements planning systems. Manage Sci 26(12): 1258–1271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinhöfel K, Albrecht AA, Wong C-K (2000) Convergence analysis of simulated annealing-based algorithms solving flow shop scheduling problems. In: Goos G, Hartmanis J, van Leeuwen J (eds) Algorithms and complexity. Lecture notes on computer science, vol 1767. Springer, Berlin, pp 277–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Straube F, Beyer I (2006) Decentralized planning in global and local networks—coordination of inter- and intraorganizational networks at tactical level. In: Proceedings of the IFSAM VIIIth world congress 2006, Berlin, Germany, pp 1–7

  • Ströbel M, Weinhardt C (2003) The montreal taxonomy for electronic negotiations. Group Decis Negot 12(2): 143–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veral EA, LaForge RL (1985) The performance of a simple incremental lot-sizing rule in a multilevel inventory environment. Decis Sci 16(1): 57–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voß S, Woodruff DL (2006) Introduction to computational optimization models for production planning in a supply chain, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh WE, Wellman MP, Wurman PR, MacKie-Mason JK (1998) Some economics of market-based distributed scheduling. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on distributed computing systems, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 612–621

  • Yelle LE (1979) Materials requirements lot sizing: a multilevel approach. Int J Prod Res 17(3): 223–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmer K (2004) Hierarchical coordination mechanisms within the supply chain. Eur J Oper Res 153(3): 687–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stuttgart University of Applied Sciences, Schellingstr. 24, 70174, Stuttgart, Germany

    Jörg Homberger

Authors
  1. Jörg Homberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jörg Homberger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Homberger, J. Decentralized multi-level uncapacitated lot-sizing by automated negotiation. 4OR-Q J Oper Res 8, 155–180 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10288-009-0104-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10288-009-0104-1

Keywords

MSC classification (2000)

Search

Navigation