| 28 Jul 2026
OptiWindNet RouteSets: a solver-diverse benchmark dataset for the offshore wind-farm cable routing problem
Abstract. Offshore wind-farm collection-system design is a cost-relevant combinatorial optimization problem whose difficulty grows exponentially with turbine count. This paper introduces OptiWindNet RouteSets, a database of cable-routing solutions to 13954 distinct problem instances based on built, proposed, and procedurally-generated farm layouts. The database is intended as an open benchmark for routing algorithms, a source of hard instances, a strong baseline for reinforcement-learning solvers, and a training corpus for supervised-learning models for the Wind Farm Cable-Routing Problem.
The solutions were produced using the optiwindnet Python package with three solvers: exact mathematical optimization and two meta-heuristics (inexact) – hybrid genetic search (HGS) and Lin–Kernighan–Helsgaun (LKH). Two network topologies are covered: radial (path-based) or branched (tree-based). Each solution contains the feasible network and its metadata (solver used, cable capacity, method configuration, route length, detour overhead, solver runtime, and, for exact runs, a proven optimality gap). The problem instances vary in: number of wind turbines (∈ [50, 200]), maximum cable capacity (∈ [2, 12]), and location geometry. For 63% of the problem instances, a solution with <1% gap is available (and 79% with <2% gap).
We analyze: (a) the total length of meta-heuristic solutions compared to their exact counterparts – HGS median increase is 0.0%, while LKH is 0.6%; (b) the instance difficulty as a function of capacity and turbine count – those two variables interact, the difficulty increases monotonically with count, but exhibits a count-dependent peak across capacities; (c) the length reduction of branched topology compared to radial – 0.34% median; (d) the detour-caused increase in length over the solver-optimized objective – 0.16% median.
Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Wind Energy Science.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
