Skip to main content
Log in

Abstract

A heuristic method TABU-CSP using Tabu Search (TS) is described for solving Constraint Satisfaction Problems (CSPs). The method is started with a complete but inconsistent solution of a binary CSP and obtained in prespecified number of iterations either a consistent solution or a near optimal solution with an acceptable number of conflicts. The repair in the solution at each iterative step is done by using two heuristics alternatively. The first heuristic is a min-conflict heuristic that chooses a variable with the maximum number of conflicts and reassigns it the value which leads to the minimum number of conflicts. If the acceptable solution is not reached after the search continued for a certain number of iterations, the min-conflict heuristic is changed and the variable selected least number of times is chosen for repair. If an acceptable solution is not reached, the method switches back to the min-conflict heuristic and proceeds further. This allowed the method to explore a different region of search space for the solution as well as to prevent cycling.

The demonstration of the method is shown on a toy problem [9] which has no solution. The method is then tested on various randomly generated CSPs with different starting solutions. The performance of the proposed method in terms of the average number of consistency is checked and the average number of conflicts is compared with that of the Branch and Bound (BB) method used to obtain the same solution. In almost all cases, the proposed method moves faster to the acceptable solution than BB.

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

  1. A.K.Mackworth;Consistencies in networks of relations, AI,8 (1977), 99–118.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. R.M. Haralick and G.L.Elliot;Increasing tree search efficiency for constraint satisfaction problems, AI, 14 (1980) 263 -313.

    Google Scholar 

  3. B. A. Nedal;The complexity of backtracking and forward — checking: search order and instance specific results, TR-CSR-88-002, Computer Science Dept., Wayne State Unversity, Detriot, Mich. (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  4. J. Gaschnig;Performance measurement and analysis of certain search algorithms, Ph. D. Thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University (1979).

  5. R. Dechter, A. Dechter and J. Pearl;Optimization in constraint networks, in R. M. Oliver and J. Q. Smith eds., Influence diagrams, belief nets and decision analysis, Wiley, New-York (1990) 411–425.

    Google Scholar 

  6. —;Networks based heuristics for CSPs, AI,34 (1988) 1–38.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. —; Enhancement schemes for constraint processing: backjumping, learning and cutset decomposition, AI,41 (1990) 273–312.

    Google Scholar 

  8. E.C. Freuder;Backtrack-free and backtrack-bounded search in L.Kanal and Vipin Kumar eds.Search in Artificial Intelligence, springer, New-York (1988) 343–369.

    Google Scholar 

  9. E.C.Freuder and R.J.Wallace;Partial Constraint Satisfaction, AI,58 (1992) 21–70.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. S. Minton et. el.;Minimizing conflicts:a heuristic repair method for constraint satisfaction and scheduling problems, AI,58 (1992) 161–205.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. D.S. Johnston et. el.;How easy is local search?, J. Comp. Syst. Sci.,37 (1988) 79–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. R.G.Simons;A theory of debugging plans and interpretations in, Proceedings AAAI-88, St.Paul, MN (1988).

  13. F.Glover;Tabu-Search, paper presented at ORSA/TIMS meeting, St.Louis, MO.(1987).

  14. ;Future paths for integer programming and links to artificial intelligence, Computers and Operations Research,13 (1986) 533–549.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. A. Hertz and D. De Werra;Using Tabu-search techniques for graph colorings, Computing,39 (1987) 343–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. E.W. Lawler and D.E. Wood;Branch and Bound methods: a survey, Operations Research,14 (1966) 699–719.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. P.A.V.Hall;Branch and bound and beyond, Proc. International joint Conference on AI ({dy1971}) 641–650.

  18. E.M.Reingold, J. Nievergelt and N. Deo;Combinatorial algorithms: theory and practice, Prentice Hall Inc., Englewood cliffs, NJ (1977).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. K. Gupta.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gupta, D.K. Using Tabu search in CSPS. Korean J. Comput. & Appl. Math. 8, 181–197 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03011631

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03011631

AMS Mathematical Subject Classification

Key words and phrases

Navigation