Adjacency constraints in forestry – a simulated annealing approach comparing different candidate solution generators

Authors

Keywords:

OR in Natural Resources, static and dynamic search vectors, grid landscapes, heuristics, Unit restriction model

Abstract

Adjacency constraints along with harvest volume constraints are important in long term forest management planning. Simulated annealing (SA) has previously been successfully applied when addressing such constraints. The objective of this paper is to assess the performance of SA using three methods for generating candidate solutions. Biased probabilities in the management unit (MU) selection were introduced, one static and one dynamic. The first one (Method 1) is the conventional (static) method. The two other methods were implemented through a search vector used in the candidate solution generator. These methods are based on (Method 2) the number of treatment schedules and standard deviation of NPV within MUs and (Method 3) the MU's potential improvement in the objective function value, the number of URM adjacency violations an MU is involved in, the period specific volume harvested in an MU and the number of times an MU is selected. The methods were tested on a large number of datasets including 300 hypothetical forest landscapes characterized by three different initial age class distributions, respectively young, normal and old. Evaluation of the methods was accomplished by means of objective function values and first feasible iteration. Solutions improved when introducing bias in the probabilities for MU selection (Methods 2 and 3) compared to the conventional method (Method 1) and when the probability bias for selecting MUs is dynamic (Method 3) rather than static (Methods 1 and 2). The mean improvement for the average GAP obtained by Method 3 for young, normal and old forest landscapes was 20.88%, 12.84% and 5.20%, respectively. Whereas for the minimum GAP the mean improvement was 21.96%, 14.30% and 6.05% for young, normal and old forest landscapes, respectively.

Author Biographies

  • Paulo Borges, Norwegian University of Life Sciences
    Ecology and Natural Resource Management, PhD Student
  • Even Bergseng, Norwegian University of Life Sciences
    Ecology and Natural Resource Management, PhD, Researcher
  • Tron Eid, Norwegian University of Life Sciences
    Ecology and Natural Resource Management, Professor

References

Barrett, T. M., Gilless, J. K., 2000. Even-aged restrictions with sub-graph adjacency. Annals of Operations Research 95(1), 159-175.

Baskent, E. Z., Jordan, G. A., 2002. Forest landscape management modeling using simulated annealing. Forest Ecology and Management 165(1-3), 29-45.

Baskent, E. Z., Keles, S., 2005. Spatial forest planning: A review. Ecological Modelling 188(2-4), 145-173.

Bettinger, P., Graetz, D., Boston, K., Sessions, J., Chung, W., 2002. Eight heuristic planning techniques applied to three increasingly difficult wildlife planning problems. Silva Fennica 36(2), 561-584.

Bettinger, P., Kim, Y., 2008. Spatial Optimisation-Computational Methods. In Designing Green Landscapes, Gadow, K., T. Pukkala (eds.). Springer, New York. pp. 111-135.

Bettinger, P., Sessions, J., Boston, K., 2009. A review of the status and use of validation procedures for heuristics used in forest planning. Mathematical and Computational Forestry & Natural-Resource Sciences (MCFNS) 1(1) 26-37.

Borges, P., Eid, T., Bergseng, E., 2014. Applying simulated annealing using different methods for the neighborhood search. European Journal of Operational Research 233(3), 700-710.

Boston, K., Bettinger, P., 1999. An analysis of Monte Carlo integer programming, simulated annealing, and tabu search heuristics for solving spatial harvest scheduling problems. Forest Science 45(2), 292-301.

Boston, K., Bettinger, P., 2006. An economic and landscape evaluation of the green-up rules for California, Oregon, and Washington (USA). Forest Policy and Economics 8(3) 251-266.

Brumelle, S., Granot, D., Halme, M., Vertinsky I., 1998. A tabu search algorithm for finding good forest harvest schedules satisfying green-up constraints. European Journal of Operational Research 106(2-3), 408-424.

Chibante, R., 2010. Simulated Annealing Theory with Applications. Sciyo. Rijeka, Croatia.

Crowe, K., Nelson, J. D., 2003. An Indirect Search Algorithm for Harvest-Scheduling Under Adjacency Constraints. Forest Science 49(1), 1-11.

Dowsland, K.A., 1995. Simulated Annealing. In Modern Heuristic Techniques for Combinatorial Problems. (ed. Reeves, C.R.), McGraw-Hill.

Falcao, A. O., Borges. J. G., 2001. Designing an evolution program for solving integer forest management scheduling models: an application in Portugal. Forest Science 47(2), 158-168.

Falcao, A. O., Borges, J. G., 2002. Combining random and systematic search heuristic procedures for solving spatially constrained forest management scheduling models. Forest Science 48(3) 608-621.

Gobakken, T., 2003. Brukerveiledning til SGIS- et skoglig geografisk informasjonssystem. Versjon 2.1. 26 p. Unpublished user manual. (In Norwegian.)

Goycoolea, M., Murray, A. T., Vielma, J. P., Weintraub, A., 2009. Evaluating Approaches for Solving the Area Restriction Model in Harvest Scheduling. Forest Science 55(2), 149-165.

Heinonen, T., Pukkala, T. 2004. A comparison of one- and two-compartment neighbourhoods in heuristic search with spatial forest management goals. Silva Fennica 38(3) 319-332.

Hoen, H. F. Eid, T. 1990. A model for analysis of treatment strategies for a forest applying standvice simulations and linear programming. Rapp. Nor. Inst. Skogforsk. 9/90, 1-35. (In Norwegian with English summary.)

Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D., Vecchi. M. P., 1983. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220(4598), 671-680.

Li, R., Bettinger, P., Boston, K., 2010. Informed Development of Meta Heuristics for Spatial Forest Planning Problems. The Open Operational Research Journal 4, 1-11.

Liu, G., Han, S., Zhao, X., Nelson, J., Wang, H., Wang, W., 2006. Optimisation algorithms for spatially constrained forest planning. Ecological Modelling 194(4), 421-428.

Lockwood, C., Moore, T., 1993. Harvest scheduling with spatial constraints: a simulated annealing approach. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 23(3), 468-478.

McDill, M.E., Braze, J., 2000. Comparing adjacency constraint formulations for randomly generated forest planning problems with four age-class distributions. Forest Science 46(3), 423-436.

McDill, M. E., Rebain, S., Braze, J., 2002. Harvest scheduling with area-based adjacency constraints. Forest Science 48(4), 631-642.

Murray, A. T., Church, R. L., 1995. Heuristic solution approaches to operational forest planning problems. OR Spektrum 17(2-3) 193-203.

Murray, A. T., Church, R. L., 1996a. Constructing and selecting adjacency constraints. INFOR, 34: 232-248.

Murray, A. T., Church, R. L., 1996b. Analyzing cliques for imposing adjacency restrictions in forest models. Forest Science 42(2) 166-175.

Murray, A. T., 1999. Spatial Restrictions in Harvest Scheduling. Forest Science 45(1), 45-52.

O'Hara, A., Faaland, B., Bare, B. B., 1989. Spatially constrained timber harvest scheduling. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 19(6), 715-724.

Rebain, S., McDill, M. E., 2003. A mixed-integer formulation of the minimum patch size problem. Forest Science, 49(4), 608-618.

Shan, Y., Bettinger, P., Cieszewski, C. J., Li, R.T., 2009. Trends in spatial forest planning. Mathematical and Computational Forestry & Natural-Resource Sciences (MCFNS) 1(2), 86-112.

Strimbu, B. M., Innes, J. L., Strimbu, V. F., 2010. A deterministic harvest scheduler using perfect bin-packing theorem. European Journal of Forest Research 129(5), 961-974.

Vielma, J. P., Murray, A. T., Ryan, D. M., Weintraub, A., 2007. Improving computational capabilities for addressing volume constraints in forest harvest scheduling problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 176(2), 1246-1264.

Weintraub, A., Murray, A. T., 2006. Review of combinatorial problems induced by spatial forest harvesting planning. Discrete Applied Mathematics 154(5), 867-879.

Wilcoxon, F., 1945. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin, 1(6), 80-83.

Ohman, K., Eriksson, L. O., 1998. The core area concept in forming contiguous areas for long-term forest planning. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 28, 1032-1039.

Ohman, K., 2000. Creating continuous areas of old forest in long-term forest planning. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 30, 1817-1823.

Ohman, K., Eriksson, L. O., 2002. Allowing for spatial consideration in long-term forest planning by linking linear programming with simulated annealing. Forest Ecology and Management 161(1-3), 221-230.

Ohman, K., Lamas, T., 2005. Reducing forest fragmentation in long-term forest planning by using the shape index. Forest Ecology and Management 212(1-3), 346-357.

Downloads

Published

2014-03-30

Issue

Section

Operations Research and Decision Support Systems

How to Cite

Adjacency constraints in forestry – a simulated annealing approach comparing different candidate solution generators. (2014). Mathematical and Computational Forestry & Natural-Resource Sciences (MCFNS), 6(1), 11-25 (15). https://v3.mcfns.com/index.php/Journal/article/view/6_11

Similar Articles

1-10 of 59

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.