Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-r8w4l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-07T14:54:11.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Enhancing group method of data handling type modeling for nonlinear systems in inventory control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2013

Maryam Pournasir ,
Md. Jahangir Alam  and
G. Marthandan
Maryam Pournasir*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Information Technology, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, Malaysia
Md. Jahangir Alam
Affiliation:
Faculty of Management, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, Malaysia
G. Marthandan
Affiliation:
Faculty of Information Technology, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, Malaysia
*
Reprint requests to: Maryam Pournasir, Faculty of Information Technology, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, Malaysia. E-mail: Pournasir.m@gamil.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Appropriate topology and coefficients have a great impact on their models' performances. This paper proposes an enhanced group method of data handling (GMDH) algorithm using a modified Levenberg–Marquardt (LM) method. In this work, evolutionary algorithm and LM techniques are deployed simultaneously for optimal design of both connectivity configuration and associated coefficients of each candidate solution in the evolving population combination. However, use of singular value decomposition technique with LM is considered as a novel method to overcome the problem of initial guess, which is presented for the first time in this research. In order to illustrate the benefits of the proposed algorithm, it has been applied in a Malaysian manufacturing company for forecasting in inventory control. Moreover, a comparison between the basic GMDH algorithm and the enhanced GMDH algorithm is made, and the results show that the accuracy of the proposed method is considerably high with reasonable reduction in processing time. Therefore, the enhanced GMDH method can be used to replace old techniques in an inventory control system to generate a structure when it is applied to a Kanban setting in the just in time system.

Keywords

Group Method of Data HandlingKanbanLevenberg–Marquard MethodSingular Value Decomposition
Type
Regular Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 27 , Issue 4 , November 2013 , pp. 377 - 385
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bishop, C. (1995). Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buryan, P., Onwubolu, G.C., & Lemke, F. (2008). Modeling tool wear in end-milling using enhanced GMDH learning networks. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 39(11–12), 1080–1092.Google Scholar
Cheng, H.D., Cai, X., Chen, X., Hu, L., & Lou, X. (2002). Computer-aided detection and classification of microcalcifications in mammograms: a survey. Journal of Pattern Recognition 36(12), 2967–2991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dan, H., Yamashita, N., & Fukushima, M. (2002). Convergence properties of the inexact Levenberg–Marquardt method under local error bound conditions. Optimization Methods & Software 17(4), 605–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ezziani, Z. (2002). Solving the 0/1 knapsack problem using an adaptive genetic algorithm. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 16(1), 23–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, J.Y., & Yuan, Y.X. (2001). On the Convergence of a New Levenberg–Marquardt Method, Report No. 005. Beijing: AMSS, Chinese Academy of Science.Google Scholar
Farlow, S.J. (1984). Self-Organizing Methods in Modeling: GMDH Type Algorithms. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Fliege, J., Drummond, L.M., & Svaiter, B.F. (2009). Newton's method for multiobjective optimization. SIAM Journal of Optimization 20, 602–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flood, I., & Worley, K. (1995). An artificial neural network approach to discrete-event simulation. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 9(1), 37–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbar, T., & Pandya, A. (2002). Software and development and simulation of neural networks using a GMDH type algorithm. Proc. SCI 2002 Conf., Orlando, FL, July 14–17.Google Scholar
Godfrey, C.O., Petr, B., & Frank, L. (2007). Modeling tool wear in end-milling using enhanced GMDH learning networks. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 39, 1080–1092.Google Scholar
Golub, G., & Reincsh, C. (1970). Singular value decomposition and least square solutions. Numerische Mathematik 14(5), 403–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, P., & Lawton, R. (1999). On the asymmetry of the symmetric MAPE. International Journal of Forecasting 15(4), 405–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiassat, M., Abbod, M., & Mort, N. (2003). Using genetic programming to improve the GMDH in time series prediction. In Statistical Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery (Hamparsum, B., Ed.), pp. 257–268. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
Iba, H., Garis, H., & Sato, T. (1994). Genetic programming using a minimum description length principle. In Advances in Genetic Programming (Kinnear, K.E. Jr., Ed.), pp. 265–284. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ivakhnenko, A.G. (1968). The group method of data handling—a rival of the method of stochastic approximation. Soviet Automatic Control 13(3), 43–55.Google Scholar
Ivakhnenko, A.G. (1995). The review of problems solvable by algorithms of the group method of data handling (GMDH). Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis 5(4), 527–535.Google Scholar
Jia, L. (1998). Fuzzy-logic-based modified single-layer perceptron segmentation network. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, October 11–14.Google Scholar
Jiang, M., Xia, L., & Shou, G. (2006). The use of genetic algorithm for solving the inverse problem of electrocardiography. Proc. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, pp. 3907–3910.Google ScholarPubMed
Kanzow, C., Yamashita, N., & Fukushima, M. (2004). Levenberg–Marquardt methods with strong local convergence properties for solving nonlinear equations with convex constraints. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 172, 375–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, T., & Adalı, T. (2003). Approximation by fully complex multilayer perceptrons. Proc. Conf. Neural Computation, pp. 1641–1666, July.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kondo, T., & Pandya, S. (2004). Identification of the multi-layered neural networks by revised GMDH-type neural network algorithm with PSS criterion. In Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems (Negoita, M.J., et al. , Eds.), LNAI, Vol. 3214, pp. 1051–1059. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemke, F. (1995). Self-Organize!—software tool for modelling and prediction of complex systems. System Analysis Modeling Simulation 20(1–2), 17–28.Google Scholar
Madala, H.R., & Ivakhnenko, A.G. (1998). Inductive Learning Algorithms for Complex Systems Modeling. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Müller, J.A. (1996). Analysis and prediction of ecological systems. System Analysis Modeling Simulation 21, 209–243.Google Scholar
Müller, J.A., & Lemke, F. (1999). Self-organizing data mining: an intelligent approach to extract knowledge from data. Accessed at http://www.knowledgeminer.com/pdf/mining.pdfGoogle Scholar
Müller, J.A., Lemk, F., & Ivakhnenko, A.G. (1994). GMDH algorithm for complex systems modeling. Mathematical and Computer Modeling of Dynamical Systems 4, 275–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muller, K.E., Barton, C.N., & Benignus, V.A. (1984). Recommendations for appropriate statistical practice in toxicologic experiments. Journal of Neurotoxicology 5(2), 113–126.Google ScholarPubMed
Nariman-Zadeh, N., Darvizeh, A., Jamali, A., & Moeini, A. (2009). Evolutionary design of generalized polynomial neural networks for modeling and prediction of explosive forming process. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 164, 1561–1571.Google Scholar
Naveen, M., Jayaraman, S., Ramanath, V., & Chaudhuri, S. (2010). Modified Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm for inverse problem. SEAL'10 Proc. 8th Int. Conf. Simulated Evolution and Learning, pp. 623–632. Berlin: Springer–Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikolaev, N.Y., & Iba, H. (2003). Polynomial harmonic GMDH learning networks for time series modelling. Neural Networks 16, 1527–1540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oh, S.K., Park, B.J., Pedrycz, W., & Ahn, T.C. (2005). Genetically optimized hybrid fuzzy neural networks based on simplified fuzzy inference rules and polynomial neurons. Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Computational Science, ICCS 2005 (Sunderam, V.S., van Albada, G.D., Sloot, P.M.A., & Dongarra, J.J., Eds.), LNCS, Vol. 3514, pp. 798–803. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onwubolu, G. (2008). Hybrid Differential Evolution and GMDH Systems, pp. 139–191. Berlin: Springer–Verlag.Google Scholar
Parente, M., Makarewicz, H., & Bishop, J. (2011). Decomposition of mineral absorption bands using nonlinear least squares curve fitting: application to Martian meteorites and CRISM data. Planetary and Space Science 59(5–6), 423–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, H.S., Park, B.J., Kim, H.K., & Oh, S.K. (2004). Self-organizing polynomial neural networks based on genetically optimized multi-layer perceptron architecture. International Journal of Control, Automation, and Systems 2(4), 423–434.Google Scholar
Press, W.H., Flannery, B.P., Teukolsky, S.A., & Vetterling, W.T. (1986). Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing (1st ed., pp. 498–539). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, C. (1998). Multi-objective optimization of polynomial models for time series prediction using genetic algorithms and neural networks. PhD Thesis. Department of Automatic Control & Systems Engineering, University of Sheffield.Google Scholar
Sedighi, M., Khandaei, M., & Shokrollahi, H. (2010). An approach in parametric identification of high strain rate constitutive model using Hopkinson pressure bar test results. Materials Science and Engineering 527(15), 3521–3528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shankar, R. (1972). The GMDH. Master's Thesis. University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Thakkar, J. (2011). A novel NN paradigm for the prediction of hematocrit value during blood transfusion. Master's Thesis. Florida Atlantic University.Google Scholar
Tourenq, J.N., Brosse, S., Guegan, J.F., & Lek, S. (1999). The use of artificial neural networks to assess fish abundance and spatial occupancy in the littoral zone of a mesotrophic lake. Ecological Modelling 120(2–3), 299–311.Google Scholar
Walker, O., Varadan, R., & Fushman, D. (2004). Efficient and accurate determination of the overall rotational diffusion tensor of a molecule from 15N relaxation data using computer program ROTDIF. Journal of Magnetic Resonance 168(2), 336–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xiang, J., Cheng, D., Schlindwein, F.S., & Jones, N.B. (2003). On the adequacy of identified Cole–Cole models. Computers & Geosciences 29(5), 647–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamashita, N., & Fukushima, M. (2000). Report on the rate of the Levenberg–Marquardt method. Paper presented at the first Sino–Japan optimization meeting, October.Google Scholar