ATTENDANCE FULFILMENT USING GENETIC ALGORITHM
MANAV GUPTA
ABSTRACT
Attendance fulfilment problem is a
Multiple Objective Optimization problem
which can be solved in lower time
complexity by evolutionary algorithms
rather than the traditional algorithm. This
paper describes genetic algorithm
approach to solve the problem of
attendance fulfilment. Same approach can
be used for various other Multiple
Objective Optimization problems.
KEYWORDS
Multiple Objective Optimization, Genetic
Algorithm, Attendance Fulfilment,
Timetable, Fitness, Crossover
INTRODUCTION
Genetic Algorithm is the method based on
the natural process of biological evolution
that can be used to solve the problems
which are difficult to solve with classical
methods. Genetic algorithm is non-
deterministic and is used to solve mainly
NP-hard problem. Multiple Objective
Optimization problem deals with multiple
objective simultaneously where the
different objectives might be required to
maximize and minimize simultaneously.
What distinguishes multiple objective GAs
from single objective GAs is how they rank
and select individuals in the population. If
there is only one objective, individuals are
naturally ranked according to this
objective, and it is clear which individuals
are best and should be selected as
parents. In case of multiple objectives, it is
still necessary to rank the individuals, but
it is no longer obvious how to do this. The
selection operator is limited to rank-based
fitness selection where rank can be
calculated based upon the fitness as
preferences for each objective. In real
world we need to deal with multiple
objectives at once and thus the area for
research in MOGA is gaining popularity.
Attendance fulfilment problem presents a
timetable for n days and m subjects each
subject having xi classes where 0≤xi≤n and
0≤i<m and minimum attendance criteria
need to be fulfilled for each subject. We
need to find an attendance plan for
students to follow which maximizes the
subjects fulfilling the minimum
attendance criteria with minimum days
need to attend the school. In attendance
fulfilment, there are two objectives i.e.
maximize the number of subjects which
fulfil the attendance criteria and minimize
the number of days to attend the school.
Our priority is to maximize the subjects
fulfilling the attendance criteria.
PRIOR WORK
To the best of our knowledge, genetic
algorithm has not been used to find the
minimum days required to attend the
school such that attendance criteria is
fulfilled. The problem belongs to class of
multi-objective optimization problems
which has been tackled by genetic
algorithms.
Carlos[1] generalises Multiple Objective
Genetic Algorithm(MOGAs) . The genetic
algorithm is seen as the optimizing
element of a multi-objective optimization
loop, which also comprises the Decision
Maker(DM). The paper describes solely
rank-based fitness assignment which can
be used for the selection operator in
MOGA. Illustrative results of how the DM
can interact with the genetic algorithm
are also presented in the paper.
Timetable Scheduling is a common
problem which can be studied for the
better insight to our problem . Liviu[2]
describes the chromosomes and different
approaches to be applied for crossover
and mutation for timetable scheduling
which can be used to solve our problem
too.
TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF
PROPOSED WORK
ASSUMPTIONS AND CONSTRAINTS
We have assumed that there can be at
most one class of a subject on a single
day. We have also assumed that student
arriving on single day will attend all the
classes on that particular day.
CHROMOSOME ENCODING
Solution to the problem can be encoded
as binary string of length n days where ith
bit corresponds to the attending the ith
day of the school and set bit represent
school to be attended by the person and
the unset bit represents the school to be
missed on that ith day.
In above string days 1,2 4,5 and 7 have set
bits and represents school to be attended
on these days and days 3 and 6 have
unset bits represents school to be missed
to be missed on those days.
FITNESS FUNCTION
The fitness of the chromosome can be
assigned as a tuple of 2 attributes. The
first attribute =
(total subjects fulfilling the
attendance criteria)
(total subjects)
The second attribute = Number of set bits
in the chromosome
Among the two attributes the preference
is given to the first attribute which we
want to maximize and then to the second
attribute which we want to minimize.
INITIAL POPULATION
The initial population can be generated
randomly by generating random
chromosomes each having length equal to
number of days of the timetable. Initial
population size must be at least n to
maintain diversity among the population.
SELECTION OPERATOR
The chromosome will be selected based
upon the k-way tournament selection.
This approach is slightly modified to give
such that less fitness chromosome have
better chance than traditional k-way
tournament selection. This is done by first
sorting the population based upon the
fitness of first attribute then the second
attribute and then directly selecting the
chromosomes rather than comparing as in
the traditional k-way tournament
selection.
Random Number generated 2 and 4
Selected
for
crossover
In above example chromosome 2 and 4
are directly selected for crossover.
CROSSOVER OPERATOR
Single point crossover operation is done
to produce the offspring. The offspring
produced replaces the parents from the
population pool.
MUTATION OPERATOR
To maintain the diversity, mutation is
introduced in the chromosomes with low
probability. The mutated chromosome
has some of its bits flipped i.e. set bit
becomes unset and vice-versa.
TERMINATION CRITERIA
The algorithm will continue to run till the
maximum generation size is reached. If
the solution has not been found a solution
which fulfils the attendance criteria for all
the subjects, the algorithms continues to
run until such solution is found.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Test Run 1:
Generation 1 fitness [0.8, 7]
Generation 2 fitness [0.8, 7]
Generation 3 fitness [0.8, 7]
Generation 4 fitness [0.8, 7]
Generation 5 fitness [0.8, 7]
Generation 6 fitness [0.8, 7]
Generation 7 fitness [0.8, 7]
Generation 8 fitness [1.0, 7]
Generation 9 fitness [0.2, 4]
Generation 10 fitness [1.0, 6]
Generation 11 fitness [1.0, 6]
Generation 12 fitness [1.0, 6]
Generation 13 fitness [1.0, 6]
Generation 14 fitness [0.6, 6]
Generation 15 fitness [0.4, 6]
Generation 16 fitness [0.4, 6]
Generation 17 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 18 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 19 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 20 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 21 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 22 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 23 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 24 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 25 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 26 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 27 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 28 fitness [1.0, 6]
Best solution fitness [1.0, 6]
Test Run 2:
Generation 1 fitness [1.0, 7]
Generation 2 fitness [1.0, 7]
Generation 3 fitness [1.0, 7]
Generation 4 fitness [1.0, 7]
Generation 5 fitness [1.0, 7]
Generation 6 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 7 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 8 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 9 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 10 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 13 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 14 fitness [0.6, 5]
Generation 15 fitness [0.6, 5] Algorithms Branimir Sigl, Marin
Generation 16 fitness [0.6, 5] Golub, Vedran Mornar
Generation 17 fitness [0.4, 6]
Generation 18 fitness [0.0, 5]
Generation 19 fitness [0.0, 5]
Generation 20 fitness [0.6, 6]
Generation 21 fitness [0.6, 6]
Generation 22 fitness [0.6, 6]
Generation 23 fitness [0.6, 6]
Generation 24 fitness [0.6, 6]
Generation 25 fitness [0.6, 6]
Generation 26 fitness [1.0, 6]
Best solution Fitness [1.0, 6]

OBSERVATION
1) Best fitness along the generation is not
constant or follows any function. Fitness
along the generation in purely random.

2) The GA is able to find the best solution

and the solution found in different runs is
found at almost same generation.

CONCLUSION
The Genetic Algorithm approach is
successfully able to find the optimal
solution for our problem in low time
complexity. This also helps in providing
basis to multiple objective optimization
problems which can be tackled by the
same approach.

REFERENCES
1. Genetic Algorithms for
Multiobjective Optimization:
Formulation, Discussion and
Generalization∗ by Carlos M.
Fonseca† and Peter J. Fleming‡
2. Timetable Experiments using
genetic algorithms by Liviu Lalescu,
Costin Badica
3. Solving Timetable Scheduling
Problem by Using Genetic