Journal of Heuristics

, Volume 12, Issue 4–5, pp 307–328 | Cite as

Bucket elimination for multiobjective optimization problems

  • Emma Rollón
  • Javier LarrosaEmail author


Multiobjective optimization deals with problems involving multiple measures of performance that should be optimized simultaneously. In this paper we extend bucket elimination (BE), a well known dynamic programming generic algorithm, from mono-objective to multiobjective optimization. We show that the resulting algorithm, MO-BE, can be applied to true multi-objective problems as well as mono-objective problems with knapsack (or related) global constraints. We also extend mini-bucket elimination (MBE), the approximation form of BE, to multiobjective optimization. The new algorithm MO-MBE can be used to obtain good quality multi-objective lower bounds or it can be integrated into multi-objective branch and bound in order to increase its pruning efficiency. Its accuracy is empirically evaluated in real scheduling problems, as well as in Max-SAT-ONE and biobjective weighted minimum vertex cover problems.


Multiobjective optimization Dynamic programming Decomposition methods Global constraints 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bensana, E., M. Lemaitre, and G. Verfaillie. (1999). “Earth Observation Satellite Management.” Constraints 4(3), 293–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertele, U. and F. Brioschi. (1972). Nonserial Dynamic Programming. Academic Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bistarelli, S., H. Fargier, U. Montanari, F. Rossi, T. Schiex, and G. Verfaillie. (1999). “Semiring-Based CSPs and Valued CSPs: Frameworks, Properties and Comparison.” Constraints 4, 199–240.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Bistarelli, S., U. Montanari, and F. Rossi. (1997). “Semiring-Based Constraint Satisfaction and Optimization.” Journal of the ACM 44(2), 201–236, March.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Brassard, G. and P. Bratley. (1995). Fundamentals of Algorithms. Prentice Hall, San Mateo, CA.Google Scholar
  6. de Givry, S., G. Verfaillie, and T. Schiex. (1997). “Bounding the Optimum of Constraint Optimization Problems.” In Proc. of CP'97., Schloss Hagenberg (Austria). LNCS. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  7. Dechter, R. (1999). “Bucket Elimination: A Unifying Framework for Reasoning.” Artificial Intelligence 113, 41–85.CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Dechter, R. (2003). Constraint Processing. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  9. Dechter, Rina and Irina, Rish. (2003). “Mini-Buckets: A General Scheme for Bounded Inference.” Journal of the ACM 50(2), 107–153, March.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Ehrgott, M. and X. Gandibleux. (2001). “Bounds and Bound Sets for Biobjective Combinatorial Optimization Problems.” Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems 507, 241–253.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehrgott, M. and X. Gandibleux. (2002). Multiple Criteria Optimization. State of the Art. Annotated Bibliographic Surveys. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. Freuder, E.C. and R.J. Wallace. (1992). “Partial Constraint Satisfaction.” Artificial Intelligence 58, 21–70, December.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Johnson, D.S. and M. Trick. (1996). “Second Dimacs Implementation Challenge: Cliques, Coloring and Satisfiability.” DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science. AMS 26.Google Scholar
  14. Korf, R. (1985). “Depth-First Iterative-Deepening: An Optimal Admissable Tree search.” Artificial Intelligence 27(3), 97–109.CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Larrosa, Javier and Emma, Rollon. (2004a). “Adaptive Consistency with Capacity Constraints.” In Workshop on Modelling and Solving Problems with Constraints. ECAI'04.Google Scholar
  16. Larrosa, Javier and Emma, Rollon. (2004b). “Bucket Elimination with Capacity Constraints.” In 6th Workshop on Preferences and Soft Constraints. CP'04.Google Scholar
  17. Meseguer, P., J. Larrosa, and M. Sanchez. (2001). “Lower Bounds for Non-Binary Constraint Optimization Problems.” In CP-2001, pp. 317–331.Google Scholar
  18. Neveu, Bertrand and Gilles, Trombettoni. (2003). “When Local Search Goes with the Winners.” In 5th Int. Workshop on Integration of AI and OR techniques in Constraint Programming for Combinatorial Optimisation Problems, CPAIOR 2003.Google Scholar
  19. Quimper, C., A. Lopez-Ortiz, P. van Beek, and A. Golynski. (2004). “Improved Algorithms for the Global Cardinality Constraint.” In Proc. of the 10th CP, pages 542–556, Toronto (CA). LNCS 3258. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  20. Regin, J.C. (1994). “A Filtering Algorithm for Constraints of Difference in CSPs.” In Proceedings of the 12th AAAI, pp. 362–367.Google Scholar
  21. Schiex, T., H. Fargier, and G. Verfaillie. (1995). “Valued Constraint Satisfaction Problems: Hard and Easy Problems.” In IJCAI-95, pages 631–637, Montréal, Canada, August.Google Scholar
  22. Sellmann, Meinolf. (2003). “Approximated Consistency for Knapsack Constraints.” In Proc. of the 9th CP, pages 679–693. LNCS 2833. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  23. Trick, Michael. (2003). “A Dynamic Programming Approach for Consistency and Propagation for Knapsack Constraints.” Annals of Operations Research 118(118), 73–84.CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. van Hentenryck, P., H. Simonis, and M. Dincbas. (1992). “Constraint Satisfaction Using Constraint Logic Programming.” Artificial Intelligence 58, 113–159.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universitat Politecnica de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations