Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Solving multiple scenarios in a combinatorial auction

2009, Computers & Operations Research

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COR.2008.12.006

Abstract

As part of its social policy, the government of Chile provides more than 1.8 million meals daily to public schoolchildren under the authority of Junta Nacional de Auxilio Escolar y Becas (JUNAEB), the state agency responsible for the program, at an annual cost of 360 million dollars. The service is provided by private firms chosen through an annual public auction. In order to capture economies of scale, a combinatorial auction design is implemented, allowing suppliers to bid on different sets of geographical units within the country. The bid evaluation process must solve multiple scenarios of a difficult combinatorial optimization model. To date, more than 2 billion dollars have been awarded under this methodology. In this paper, we describe the 2006 auction process and report that solution times can be significantly improved if the scenarios are solved in an appropriate order and the optimal solution to one scenario is employed as the initial solution of another. Results reflecting these improvements are given for real instances of the 2006 auction.

References (24)

  1. Rothkopf MH, Pekec A, Harstad RM. Computationally manageable combinatorial auctions. Management Science 1998;44(8):1131-47.
  2. Epstein R, Henriquez L, Catalan J, Weintraub GY, Martinez C. A combinatorial auction improves school meals in Chile. Interfaces 2002;32(6):1-14.
  3. Epstein R, Henriquez L, Catalan J, Weintraub GY, Martinez C, Espejo F. A combinatorial auction improves school meals in Chile: a case of OR in developing countries. International Transactions in Operational Research 2004;11(6):593-612.
  4. Elmaghraby W, Keskinocak P. The practice of supply chain management: where theory and application converge. New York: Springer; 2006 pp. 245-258.
  5. Hohner G, Rich J, Ng E, Reid G, Davenport AJ, Kalagnanam JR. et al. Combinatorial and quantity-discount procurement auctions benefit Mars, incorporated and its suppliers. Interfaces 2003;33(1):23-35.
  6. Sheffi Y. Combinatorial auctions in the procurement of transportation services. Interfaces 2004;34(4):245-52.
  7. Metty T, Harlan R, Samelson Q, Moore T, Morris T, Sorensen R. et al. Reinventing the supplier negotiation process at Motorola. Interfaces 2005;35(1):7-23.
  8. Sandholm T, Levine D, Concordia M, Martyn P, Hughes R, Jacobs J. et al. Changing the game in strategic sourcing at Procter & Gamble: expressive competition enabled by optimization. Interfaces 2006;36(1):55-68.
  9. Cramton P, Shoham Y, Steinberg R. Combinatorial auctions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2006.
  10. Milgrom P. Putting auction theory to work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004.
  11. Capen EC, Clapp RV, Campbell WM. Competitive bidding in high-risk situations. Journal of Petroleum Technology 1971;23:641-53.
  12. Fujishima Y, Leyton-Brown K, Shoham Y. Taming the computational complexity of combinatorial auctions: optimal and approximate approaches. In: Proceedings of the sixteenth international joint conference on artificial intelligence. Stockholm, Sweden, 1999. p. 533-48.
  13. Andersson A, Tenhunen M, Ygge F. Integer programming for combinatorial auction winner determination. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on multi-agent systems. 2000. p. 39-46.
  14. Sandholm T, Suri S, Gilpin A, Levine D. CABOB: a fast optimal algorithm for winner determination in combinatorial auctions. Management Science 2005;51(3):374-90.
  15. Gunluk O, Ladanyi L, de Vries S. A branch-and-price algorithm and new test problems for spectrum auctions. Management Science 2005;51(3):391-406.
  16. Fulkerson D, Nemhauser GL, Trotter LE. Two computationally difficult set- covering problems that arise in computing the 1-width of incidence matrices of Steiner triple systems. Mathematical Programming Study 1974;2:72-81.
  17. Avis D. A note on some computational difficult set-covering problems. Mathematical Programming 1980;18:138-45.
  18. Chvatal V. A greedy heuristic for the set-covering problem. Mathematics of Operations Research 1979;4:233-5.
  19. Crowder HP, Johnson EL, Paldberg MW. Solving large scale 0-1 linear programming problems. Operations Research 1983;31:803-34.
  20. Balakrishnan A, Magnanti TL, Wong RT. A dual-ascent procedure for large-scale uncapacitated network design. Operations Research 1989;31:716-40.
  21. Fischetti M, Lodi A. Local branching. Mathematical Programming B 2003;98: 23-47.
  22. Danna E, Rothberg E, Le Pape C. Exploring relaxation induced neighborhoods to improve MIP solutions. Technical Report ILOG 004; 2003.
  23. Hansen P, Mladenovic N, Urosevic D. Variable neighborhood search and local branching. Computers & Operations Research 2006;33:3034-45.
  24. Bronmo G, Christiansen M, Fagerholt K, Nygreen B. A multi-start local search heuristic for ship scheduling-a computational study. Computers & Operations Research 2007;34:900-17.