Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Constraint Logic Programming and Integer Programming approaches and their collaboration in solving an assignment scheduling problem

  • Published:
Constraints Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Generalised Assignment Problems (GAP), traditionally solved by Integer Programming techniques, are addressed in the light of current Constraint Programming methods. A scheduling application from manufacturing, based on a modified GAP, is used to examine the performance of each technique under a variety of problem characteristics. Experimental evidence showed that, for a set of assignment problems, Constraint Logic Programming (CLP) performed consistently better than Integer Programming (IP). Analysis of the CLP and IP processes identified ways in which the search was effective. The insight gained from the analysis led to an Integer Programming approach with significantly improved performance. Finally, the issue of collaboration between the two contrasting approaches is examined with respect to ways in which the solvers can be combined in an effective manner.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bellone, J., Chamard, A., & Pradelles. C (1992). ‘Plane’: an evolutive planning system for aircraft production written in CHIP. In Proceedings of the Practical Applications of Prolog Conference.

  2. British Telecom Laboratories. 250-118 Data Sets of Workforce Management Scheduling Problem. With permission of British Telecom, “http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/CSP/wfs”.

  3. City University Constraints Archive. 11 Data Sets for the Frequency Assignment Problem. With permission of “Centre d'Electronique de l'Armement”, ftp.cs.city.ac.uk/pub/constraints/benchmarks/celar/

  4. CPLEX OPTIMIZATION, Inc. (1995). Version 4.0 of Using the CPLEX Callable Library and CPLEX Mixed Integer Library. Incline Village, NV: CPLEX Optimization, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Crowder, H. P., Dembo, R. S., & Mulvey, J. M. (1978). Reporting mathematical experiments in mathematical programming. In Mathematical Programming 15:316–329.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dincbas, M., & Simonis, H. (1991). APACHE—A constraint based automated stand allocation system. In Proceedings of the Advanced Software Technology in Air Transport Conference, pages 267–282.

  7. Duncan, T. (1994). Schedule IT: Experiences with a constraint based approach to building an intelligent vehicle scheduling system. Presented at Constraint Handling Techniques Seminar. Operational Research Society.

  8. El-Sakkout. (1995). Modelling fleet assignment in a flexible environment. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Practical Application of Constraint Technology (PACT 96), pages 27–39.

  9. European Computer Research Centre, Munich (1994). ECLiPSe User Guide. ECRC GmbH, Arabellastr. 17, Munich, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fisher, M., & Jaikumar, R. (1981). A generalized assignment heuristic for the large scale vehicle routing problem. In Networks 11(2):109–124.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hajian, M. T., El-Sakkout, H., Wallace, M., Lever., J. M., & Richards. E. B. (1995). Towards a closer integration of finite domain propagation and simplex-based algorithms. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Mathematics. Also at http://www-icparc.doc.ic.ac.uk/papers

  12. Haralick, R. M., & Elliot, G. L. (1980). Increasing tree search efficiency for constraint satisfaction problems. In Artificial Intelligence 14:263–313.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Little, J., & Darby-Dowman, K. (1995). The significance of constraint logic programming to operational research. In M. Lawrence and C. Wilsdon, editors, Operational Research Tutorial Papers, pages 20–45.

  14. Martello, S., & Toth, P. (1981). An algorithm for the generalized assignment problem. In J. P. Brans, editor, Operational Research '81, pages 589–603, North-Holland.

  15. Martello, S., and Toth, P. (1990). Knapsack Problems. John Wiley and Sons Ltd.

  16. MIPLIB (1996). http://www.caam.rice.edu/bixby/miplib/miplib.html

  17. Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd and Brunel University (1995). FortMP Manual, Release 1, Oxford, UK: NAG Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ross, G. T., & Soland, R. M. (1977). Modelling facility location problems as generalised assignment problems. In Management Science 24(3):345–357.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Smith, B., Brailsford, S., Hubbard, P. M., & Williams, H. P. (1995). The progressive party problem: Integer linear programming and constraint propagation compared. In Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming—CP'95, Proceedings of the First International Conference, pages 36–52, Springer-Verlag.

  20. Stella, F., Vercellis, C., & Zaffalon, M. (1994). A GAP formulation of production planning problems in reconfigurable assembly lines. In Operations Research Proceedings 1994, pages 334–338, Springer-Verlag.

  21. Shtub, A. (1989). Modelling group technology cell formation as a generalized assignment problem. In International Journal of Production Research 27(5):775–782.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Van Hentenryck, P., & Carillon, J. (1988). Generality versus specificity: An experience with AI and OR techniques. In American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-88).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Brunel University, UB8 3PH, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK

    Ken Darby-Dowman

  2. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Brunel University, UB8 3PH, Uxbridge, UK, Middlesex

    James Little

  3. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Brunel University, UB8 3PH, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK

    Gautam Mitra

  4. Universitá degli studi di Milano Dip. di Matematica, Via Cicognara 7, 20129, Milan, Italy

    Marco Zaffalon

Authors
  1. Ken Darby-Dowman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James Little
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gautam Mitra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marco Zaffalon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Darby-Dowman, K., Little, J., Mitra, G. et al. Constraint Logic Programming and Integer Programming approaches and their collaboration in solving an assignment scheduling problem. Constraints 1, 245–264 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00137871

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00137871

Keywords

Search

Navigation