Advertisement

Constraints

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 339–379 | Cite as

Explanation-based large neighborhood search

  • Charles Prud’homme
  • Xavier Lorca
  • Narendra Jussien
Article

Abstract

One of the most well-known and widely used local search techniques for solving optimization problems in Constraint Programming is the Large Neighborhood Search (LNS) algorithm. Such a technique is, by nature, very flexible and can be easily integrated within standard backtracking procedures. One of its drawbacks is that the relaxation process is quite often problem dependent. Several works have been dedicated to overcome this issue through problem independent parameters. Nevertheless, such generic approaches need to be carefully parameterized at the instance level. In this paper, we demonstrate that the issue of finding a problem independent neighborhood generation technique for LNS can be addressed using explanation-based neighborhoods. An explanation is a subset of constraints and decisions which justifies a solver event such as a domain modification or a conflict. We evaluate our proposal for a set of optimization problems. We show that our approach is at least competitive with or even better than state-of-the-art algorithms and can be easily combined with state-of-the-art neighborhoods. Such results pave the way to a new use of explanation-based approaches for improving search.

Keywords

LNS Explanations Optimization Neighborhoods 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

10601_2014_9166_MOESM1_ESM.tex (12 kb)
(TEX 11.8 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Atkins, K.E. (1989). An introduction to numerical analysis.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cambazard, H, & Jussien, N (2006). Identifying and exploiting problem structures using explanation-based constraint programming. Constraints, 11 (4), 295–313.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chabrier, A, Danna, E, Le Pape, C, Perron, L (2004). Solving a network design problem. Annals of Operations Research, 130 (1–4), 217–239.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Copado-Méndez, PJ, Blum, C, Guillén-Gosálbez, G, Jiménez, L (2013). Application of large neighborhood search to strategic supply chain management in the chemical industry. In Hybrid metaheuristics (pp. 335–352). Springer.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Danna, E, & Perron, L. (2003). Structured vs. unstructured large neighborhood search: A case study on job-shop scheduling problems with earliness and tardiness costs In Rossi, F (Ed.), Principles and practice of constraint programming? Lecture notes in computer science, CP 2003 (Vol. 2833, pp. 817–821). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Debruyne, R, Ferrand, G, Jussien, N, Lesaint, W, Ouis, S, Tessier, A (2003). Correctness of constraint retraction algorithms. In FLAIRS’03: 16th international Florida artificial intelligence research society conference (pp. 172–176). St. Augustine: AAAI press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Demir, E, Bektaṡ, T, Laporte, G (2012). An adaptive large neighborhood search heuristic for the pollution-routing problem. European Journal of Operational Research.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gent, IP., Miguel, I, Moore, N.C.A., Peña, R. (2010). Lazy explanations for constraint propagators. In Carro, M (Ed.), Practical aspects of declarative languages, lecture notes in computer science (Vol 5937 pp. 217–233). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ginsberg, M. (1993). Dynamic backtracking. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 1, 25–46.MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Godard, D, Laborie, P, Nuijten, W (2005). Randomized large neighborhood search for cumulative scheduling. In: ICAPS (Vol. 5, pp. 81–89).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harvey, W, & Schimpf, J (2002). Bounds consistency techniques for long linear constraints. Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jussien, N., & Lhomme, O. (2002). Local search with constraint propagation and conflict-based heuristics. Artificial Intelligence, 139 (1), 21–45.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jussien, N (2003). The versatility of using explanations within constraint programming. Technical Report 03-04-INFO.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jussien, N, Debruyne, R, Boizumault, P (September 2000). Maintaining arc-consistency within dynamic backtracking. In Principles and practice of constraint programming (CP 2000), lecture notes in computer science (no. 1894 pp. 249–261). Singapore: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jussien, N, & Lhomme, O (1998). Dynamic domain splitting for numeric csps. In European conference on artificial intelligence (ECAI’98) (pp. 224–228).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kovacs, AA, Parragh, SN, Doerner, KF, Hartl, RF (2012). Adaptive large neighborhood search for service technician routing and scheduling problems. Journal of scheduling, 15 (5), 579–600.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Laborie, P., & Godard, D. (2007). Self-adapting large neighborhood search:application to single-mode scheduling problems. In P. Baptiste, G. Kendall, A. Munier-Kordon, and F. Sourd (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd multidisciplinary international conference on scheduling: theory and applications (MISTA 2007) (pp. 276–284). Paris. Paper.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mairy, J-B, Deville, Y, Hentenryck, PV (2011). Reinforced adaptive large neighborhood search. In 8th workshop on local search techniques in constraint satisfaction (LSCS2011).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mairy, J-B, Schaus, P, Deville, Y (2010). Generic adaptive heuristics for large neighborhood search. In 7th workshop on local search techniques in constraint satisfaction (LSCS2010).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Malitsky, Y, Mehta, D, O’Sullivan, B, Simonis, H (2013). Tuning parameters of large neighborhood search for the machine reassignment problem. In Integration of AI and OR techniques in constraint programming for combinatorial optimization problems (pp. 176–192). Springer.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ohrimenko, O, Stuckey, PJ., Codish, M (2009). Propagation via lazy clause generation. Constraints, 14 (3), 357–391.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Perron, L. (2003). Fast restart policies and large neighborhood search In Rossi, F (Ed.), , Principles and practice of constraint programming at CP 2003, lecture notes in computer science(Vol. 2833). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Perron, L, Shaw, P, Rueher, M. (2004). Combining forces to solve the car sequencing problem In Régin, J-C (Ed.), Integration of AI and OR techniques in constraint programming for combinatorial optimization problems, lecture notes in computer science (Vol 2833 pp. 225–239). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Perron, L, Shaw, P, Furnon, V (2004). Propagation guided large neighborhood search. In CP’04 (pp. 468–481).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pisinger, D, & Ropke, S (2010). Large neighborhood search. In Handbook of metaheuristics (pp. 399–419). Springer.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pralet, C, Verfaillie, G, Rueher, M. (2004). Travelling in the world of local searches in the space of partial assignments. In Régin, J-C (Ed.), , CPAIOR, volume 3011 of lecture notes in computer science, (pp. 240–255): Springer.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Prosser, P. (1995). MAC-CBJ: maintaining arc consistency with conflict-directed backjumping. Technical Report Research Report/95/177. Dept. of Computer Science, University of Strathclyde.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Prud’homme, C, & Fages, J-G (2013). Introduction to choco3. In 1st Workshop on CPSolvers: modeling, applications, integration, and standardization, CP. http://choco.emn.fr.
  29. 29.
    Roli, A, Benedettini, S, Stützle, T, Blum, C (2012). Large neighbourhood search algorithms for the founder sequence reconstruction problem. Computers & operations research, 39 (2), 213–224.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schiex, T., & Verfaillie, G. (1994). Nogood recording for static and dynamic constraint satisfaction problem. IJAIT, 3 (2), 187–207.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shaw, P, & Puget, J-F. (1998). Using constraint programming and local search methods to solve vehicle routing problems. In Maher, M (Ed.), Principles and practice of constraint programming, CP98, lecture notes in computer science ( Vol. 1520 pp. 417–431). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stuckey, PJ (2010). Lazy clause generation: Combining the power of sat and cp (and mip?) solving. In CPAIOR (pp. 5–9).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Verfaillie, G, & Jussien, N (2005). Constraint solving in uncertain and dynamic environments – a survey. Constraints, 10 (3), 253–281.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles Prud’homme
    • 1
  • Xavier Lorca
    • 1
  • Narendra Jussien
    • 2
  1. 1.EMNantes, INRIA TASC, CNRS LINANantes Cedex 3France
  2. 2.Télécom LilleVilleneuve d’Ascq CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations