美国数学建模竞赛特等奖论文——1997 B O Meetings Bloody Meetings【数学建模】.pdfVIP

Meetings, Bloody Meetings! 321 Meetings, Bloody Meetings! Joshua M. Horstman Jamie Kawabata James C. Moore, IV Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Terre Haute, IN 47803 Advisor: Aaron D. Klebanoff Introduction We present a model and three algorithms for solving the problem of schedul- ing An Tostal Corporation’s upcoming board meeting. To determine how well a schedule will fit An Tostal Corporation’s needs, we establish a badness function based on assumptions as to what kinds of schedules are desirable. These as- sumptions include that a good mix of people in meetings is pivotal for effective idea-sharing. The algorithms that we compare are based on random selection, greedy assignment, and greedy assignment followed by hill-climbing. The random algorithm places board members at random. The greedy algorithm assigns one member at a time by examining which possibility is locally optimal, hoping for a solution that is globally optimal. The greedy algorithm with hill-climbing enhances the greedy algorithm’s effectiveness by tweaking the schedule in a manner that will cause the schedule to edge closer and closer to optimality. We also provide a simple algorithm that will allow a secretary to handle any unforeseen additions or cancellations. This algorithm is designed to alter as few board members’ schedules as possible while still obtaining a good mix of people. Finally, we summarize the strengths and weaknesses of the algorithms pre- sented, present a sample solution for use by the An Tostal Corporation, and conclude that the “greedy-twiddle” algorithm is most effective and provides a very good solution nearly every time. c The UMAP Journal 18 (3) (1997) 321–329. Copyright 1997 by COMAP, Inc. All rights reserved. Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this w