Skip to main content
Log in

Branch and win: OR tree search algorithms for solving combinatorial optimisation problems

  • Published:
Top Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Currently, most combinatorial optimisation problems have to be solved, if the optimum solution is sought, using general techniques to explore the space of feasible solutions and, more specifically, through exploratory enumerative procedures in trees and search graphs. We propose Branch and Win, a general formulation for understanding and synthesising the different tree search procedures that have been presented in the literature of operations research as well as in that of artificial intelligence. Several general ideas are also presented, whose application allows designing new hybrid search algorithms, in order to implement the procedure.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barr A. and Feigenbaum E.A. (eds) (1981).The Handbook of Artificial Intelligence (Volume 1). Kaufmann.

  • Bockmayr A. and Kasper T. (1998). Branch and Infer: A Unifying Framework for Integer and Finite Domain Constraint Programming.INFORMS Journal on Computing 10, 287–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brailsford S.C., Potts C.N. and Smith B.M. (1999). Constraint Satisfaction Problems: Algorithms and Applications.European Journal of Operational Research 119, 557–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Companys R. (1975). Programación Combinatoria: Aplicación a la Ordenación de Trabajos en un Ordenador con Sistema Operativo en Discos.Symposia Mathematica XV, 83–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corominas A. and Companys R. (1977). Procedimiento Generalizado de Branch and Bound.Qüestiió 1, 49–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corrêa R. (1995). A Parallel Formulation for General Branch-and-Bound Algorithms.Lecture Notes in Computer Science 980, 395–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldengorin B., Ghosh D. and Sierksma G. (2004). Branch and Peg Algorithms for the Simple Plant Location Problem.Computers and Operations Research 31, 241–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg H.J. (1996). Artificial Intelligence. In: Gass S.I. and Harris C.M. (eds),The Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 25–28.

  • Haralick R. and Elliott G. (1980). Increasing Tree Search Efficiency for Constraint Satisfaction Problems.Artificial Intelligence 14, 263–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart P.E., Nilsson N.J. and Raphael B. (1968). A Formal Basis for the Heuristic Determination of Minimum Cost Paths.IEEE Transactions on System Science and Cybernetics SSC-4, 100–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helman P. (1989). A Common Schema for Dynamic Programming and Branch and Bound Algorithms.Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 36, 97–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman K.L. and Padberg M. (1993). Solving Airline Crew Scheduling Problems by Branch-and-Cut.Management Science 39, 657–682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibaraki T. (1988). Enumerative Approaches to Combinatorial Optimization, part I and II.Annals of Operations Research 10 and 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korf R.E. (1990). Search. In: Shapiro S.C. (ed),Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence. John Wiley, 994–998.

  • Kumar V. and Kanal L. (1983a). A General Branch and Bound Formulation for Understanding and Synthesising And/Or Tree Search Procedures.Artificial Intelligence 21, 179–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar V. and Kanal L. (1983b). The Composite Decision Process: a Unifying Formulation for Heuristic Search, Dynamic Programming and Branch and Bound Procedures.Proceedings of the Third National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 220–224.

  • Marsten R.E. and Morin T.L. (1978). A Hybrid Approach to Discrete Mathematical Programming.Mathematical Programming 14, 21–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nau D.S., Kumar V. and Kanal L. (1984). General Branch and Bound, and its Relation to A* and AO*.Artificial Intelligence 23, 29–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson N.J. (1971).Problem-Solving Methods in Artificial Intelligence. McGraw-Hill.

  • Nilsson N.J. (1980).Principles of Artificial Intelligence. Kaufmann.

  • Pastor R. (1999).Metalgoritmo de Optimización Combinatoria Mediante la Exploración de Grafos. Ph.D. Dissertation, Technology University of Catalonia.

  • Pastor R. and Corominas A. (2000). Strategies of Node Selection in Search Procedures for Solving Combinatorial Optimization Problems: A Survey and a General Formalization programming.Top 8, 111–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearl J. (1984).Heuristics: Intelligent Search Strategies for Computer Problem Solving. Addison-Wesley.

  • Rich E. and Knight K. (1991).Artificial Intelligence. McGraw-Hill.

  • Ryoo H.S. and Sahinidis N.V. (1996). A Branch-and-Reduce Approach to Global Optimization.Journal of Global Optimization 8, 107–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savelsbergh M. (1997). A Branch-and-Price Algorithm for the Generalized Assignment Problem.Operations Research 45, 831–841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuy H. and Horst R. (1988). Convergence and Restart in Branch-and-Bound Algorithms for Global Optimization. Application to Concave Minimization and D.C. Optimization Problems.Mathematical Programming 41, 161–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pastor, R., Corominas, A. Branch and win: OR tree search algorithms for solving combinatorial optimisation problems. Top 12, 169–191 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02578930

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02578930

Key Words

AMS subject classification

Navigation