Scheduling the maintenances of nuclear power plants is a complex optimization problem, formulated in 2-stage stochastic programming for the EURO ROADEF 2010 challenge. The first level optimizes the maintenance dates and refueling decisions. The second level optimizes the production to fulfill the power demands and to ensure feasibility and costs of the first stage decisions. This paper solves a deterministic version of the problem, studying Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) formulations and matheuristics. Relaxing only two sets of constraints of the ROADEF challenge, a MIP formulation can be written using only binary variables for the maintenance dates. The MIP formulations are used to design constructive matheuristics and a Variable Neighborhood Descent (VND) local search. These matheuristics produce very high quality solutions. Some intermediate results explains results of the Challenge: the relaxation of constraints CT6 are justified and neighborhood analyses with MIP-VND justifies the choice of neighborhoods to implement for the problem. Lastly, an extension with stability costs for monthly reoptimization is considered, with efficient bi-objective matheuristics.
An open question after the Challenge was to prove dual bounds for the large size instances of the competition. (2013) furnished the first dual bounds @cite_2 using dual heuristics, the bounds proven in @cite_28 @cite_27 improved these last bounds.
@cite_28 @cite_27 @cite_2
2807125841 2401584318 1970259241 1888573181
The EURO ROADEF 2010 Challenge aimed to schedule the maintenance and refueling operations of French nuclear power plants, ranking the approaches in competition for the quality of primal solutions. This paper justifies the high quality of the best solutions computing dual bounds with dual heuristics. A first step designs several Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) relaxations with different compromises between computation time and quality of dual bounds. To deal with smaller MIPs, we prove how reductions in the number of time steps and scenarios can guarantee dual bounds for the whole problem of the Challenge. Several sets of dual bounds are computable, improving significantly the former best dual bounds of the literature. Intermediate results allow also a better understanding of the problem and offer perspectives to improve some approaches of the Challenge. We give a simple proof that the ranking algorithm of Karp, Vazirani and Vazirani [KVV90] is 1-1 e competitive for the online bipartite matching problem. The proof is via a randomized primal-dual argument. Primal-dual algorithms have been successfully used for many online algorithm problems, but the dual constraints are always satisfied deterministically. This is the first instance of a non-trivial randomized primal-dual algorithm in which the dual constraints only hold in expectation. The approach also generalizes easily to the vertex-weighted version considered by [AGKM11]. Further we show that the proof is very similar to the deterministic primal-dual argument for the online budgeted allocation problem with small bids (also called the AdWords problem) of [MSVV05]. We show that a parallel repetition of any two-prover one-round proof system (MIP(2,1)) decreases the probability of error at an exponential rate. No constructive bound was previously known. The constant in the exponent (in our analysis) depends only on the original probability of error and on the total number of possible answers of the two provers. The dependency on the total number of possible answers is logarithmic, which was recently proved to be almost the best possible [U. Feige and O. Verbitsky, Proc.11th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1996, pp. 70--76]. We present two general methods for proving lower bounds on the query complexity of nonadaptive quantum algorithms. Both methods are based on the adversary method of Ambainis. We show that they yield optimal lower bounds for several natural problems, and we challenge the reader to determine the nonadaptive quantum query complexity of the ''1-to-1 versus 2-to-1'' problem and of Hidden Translation. In addition to the results presented at Wollic 2008 in the conference version of this paper, we show that the lower bound given by the second method is always at least as good (and sometimes better) as the lower bound given by the first method. We also compare these two quantum lower bounds to probabilistic lower bounds.