Timeline for How to resolve this issue in multi-objective optimization?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2020 at 8:36 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Sep 18, 2019 at 14:51 | vote | accept | KGM | ||
| Sep 18, 2019 at 14:49 | history | edited | TheSimpliFire♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Improved TeX formatting, made the expressions under max larger and more readable
|
| Sep 18, 2019 at 14:38 | vote | accept | KGM | ||
| Sep 18, 2019 at 14:51 | |||||
| S Sep 18, 2019 at 14:37 | history | bounty ended | KGM | ||
| S Sep 18, 2019 at 14:37 | history | notice removed | KGM | ||
| Sep 18, 2019 at 14:25 | answer | added | drskd | timeline score: 5 | |
| Sep 17, 2019 at 15:32 | comment | added | KGM | @RolfvanLieshout, for example, cost minimization and quality maximization are conflicting objectives. This is not the case in this optimization. Yes, you got it right. | |
| Sep 17, 2019 at 9:51 | comment | added | Rolf van Lieshout | What do you mean by "the objectives are non-conflicting"? Do you mean that the overall problem can be solved by solving a problem for each subsystem independently? | |
| Sep 17, 2019 at 1:20 | comment | added | LarrySnyder610 | This is a much cleaner and clearer statement of your question. I hope someone will post a good answer and claim your bounty! | |
| Sep 16, 2019 at 18:52 | history | edited | KGM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 2833 characters in body
|
| Sep 12, 2019 at 15:19 | history | edited | KGM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Sep 11, 2019 at 16:12 | history | edited | KGM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 10 characters in body
|
| S Sep 11, 2019 at 16:03 | history | bounty started | KGM | ||
| S Sep 11, 2019 at 16:03 | history | notice added | KGM | Authoritative reference needed | |
| Sep 11, 2019 at 15:41 | history | edited | KGM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 3 characters in body
|
| Sep 11, 2019 at 15:34 | history | edited | KGM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1290 characters in body
|
| Sep 10, 2019 at 11:53 | history | edited | KGM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 573 characters in body
|
| Sep 10, 2019 at 9:33 | comment | added | KGM | @OguzToragay, thanks for your comments. The supply to users are provided in a time-slot manner. There are $N_{TS}$ time slots. At each time slot, only 3 subsystems can be active. Each subsystem has its own resources. But due to hardware and power limitations, only 3 subsystems can be active at any time slot. The reason I put $t_S$ in the objective is that, I want to be fair subsystem wise. So, the number of time slots, one subsystem will remain active depends on the total demand of that subsystem. If a subsystem has overall low demand, the subsystem can be active for less number of time slots. | |
| Sep 9, 2019 at 16:42 | comment | added | Oguz Toragay | Are the suppliers shared? Can the costumers' demand be satisfied by more than one supplier? Your problem looks like your previous question here: or.stackexchange.com/q/1434/39 but I still can't really see the appropriate details. Could you elaborate a little more? For example why you put $t_S$ in the objective function? if you maximize all the $t_{sub i}$ as they are positive the summation of all will be automatically maximized. | |
| Sep 9, 2019 at 15:56 | history | edited | TheSimpliFire♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Improved formatting
|
| Sep 9, 2019 at 15:50 | history | asked | KGM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |