An alternating heuristic for medianoid and centroid problems in the plane

Computers and Operations Research

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 553-565

  Bhadury, J ^a   Eiselt, H A ^b   Jaramillo, J H ^c  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK   (Canada)

^c Tampa Airlines   (Colombia)

Author keywords

Centroid; Competitive location model; Heuristic methods; Medianoid; Stackelberg solution

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; DISCRETE TIME CONTROL SYSTEMS; HEURISTIC METHODS;

CENTROID PROBLEMS; COMPETITIVE LOCATION MODELS;

OPERATIONS RESEARCH;

HEURISTICS;

EID: 0037375195     PISSN: 03050548     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0305-0548(02)00024-2     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Hotelling H. Stability in competition. Economic Journal 1929;39:41-57.
2. Eiselt HA, Laporte G, Thisse J-F. Competitive location models: a framework and bibliography. Transportation Science 1993;27:44-54.
3. Stackelberg H von. Grundlagen der theoretischen Volkswirtschaftslehre, 1943. Translated by Peacock AT. The Theory of the Market Economy. London-Edinburgh-Glasgow: W. Hodge, 1952.
4. Ghosh A, Buchanan B. Multiple outlets in a duopoly: a first entry paradox. Geographical Analysis 1988;20:111-21.
5. Eiselt HA, Laporte G. Review of sequential location problems. European Journal of Operational Research 1996;96:217-31.
6. Hakimi SL. On locating new facilities in a competitive environment. European Journal of Operational Research 1983;12:29-35.
7. p)-medianoid and (r/p)-centroid problems. Location Science 1994;2:193-204.
8. Serra D, ReVelle C. Market capture by two competitors: the preemptive location problem. Journal of Regional Science 1994;34:549-61.
9. Swain R. A parametric decomposition algorithm for the solution of uncapacitated location problems. Management Science 1974;21:189-98.
10. Drezner Z. Competitive location strategies for two facilities. Regional Science and Urban Economics 1982;12: 485-93.
11. Infante-Macias R, Munoz-Perez J. Competitive location with rectilinear distances. European Journal of Operational Research 1995;80:77-85.
12. Eiselt HA, Laporte G. Demand allocation functions. Location Science 1998;6:175-87.
13. Hakimi SL. Locations with spatial interactions: competitive locations and games. In: Mirchandani PB, Francis RL, editors. Discrete location theory. New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1990. p. 439-78.
14. O'Rourke J. Computational geometry in C. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
15. ReVelle C. The maximum capture or 'sphere of influence' location problem: Hotelling revisited on a network. Journal of Regional Science 1986;26:343-58.
16. d'Aspremont J, Gabszewicz JJ, Thisse J-F. On Hotelling's 'stability in competition'. Econometrica 1979;49:1145-50.
17. Eaton BC, Lipsey RG. The principle of minimum differentiation reconsidered: some new developments in the theory of spatial competition. Review of Economic Studies 1975;42:27-49.
18. Sherali HD, Soyster AL. Convergence analysis and algorithmic implications of two dynamic processes toward an oligopoly-competitive fringe equilibrium set. Computers and Operations Research 1988;15:69-81.
19. Okabe A, Suzuki A. Stability of spatial competition for a large number of firms on a bounded two-dimensional space. Environment and Planning 1987;A19:1067-82.
20. Slater P. Maximin facility location. Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards. Section B: Mathematical Sciences 1975;79:107-15.
21. Bhadury J, Eiselt HA. Reachability of locational Nash equilibria. Operations Research Spectrum 1998;20:101-7.
22. Rosing KE. Heuristic concentration: a study of stage one. Environment and Planning B 2000;27:137-50.
23. Serra D, Eiselt HA, Laporte G, ReVelle CS. Market capture models under various customer choice rules. Environment and Planning B 1999;26:741-50.