Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mathematical Programming Techniques in Constraint Programming: A Short Overview

  • Published:
Journal of Heuristics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In recent years, the integration of techniques from Artificial Intelligence and Operations Research has shown to improve the solutions of complex and large scale combinatorial optimization problems, in terms of efficiency, scalability and optimality. In this context, Constraint Programming is an emerging discipline situated at the confluence of the two fields that has been recognized as a suitable environment for achieving such an integration. This paper briefly presents the integration directions explored in the literature, and provides some pointers to relevant work in these directions.

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

  • Applegate, D., R.E. Bixby, V. Chvátal, and W. Cook. (1998). “On the Solution of Traveling Salesman Problems.” Documenta Mathematica ICM III, 645–656.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ascheuer, N., M. Fischetti, and M. Grötschel. (2001). “Solving the Asymmetric Travelling Salesman Problem with Time Windows by Branch-and-Cut.” Mathematical Programming 90, 475–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, P. and A. Bockmayr. (1995). “Finite Domain and Cutting Plane Techniques in CLP(PB).” In L. Sterling (ed.), Logic Programming—Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Logic Programming. Cambridge, MA: The MIT-Press. pp. 133–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beringer, H. and B. De Backer. (1995) “Combinatorial Problem Solving in Constraint Logic Programming with Cooperating Solvers.” In C. Beierle and L. Plümer (eds.), Logic Programming: Formal Methods and Practical Applications. Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 245–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockmayr, A. and T. Kasper. (1996) “Pseudo-Boolean and Finite Domain Constraint Programming: A Case Study.” In U. Geske and H. Simonis (eds.), Deklarative Constraint Programmierung, Dresden. GMD-Studien Nr. 297.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlier, J. and E. Pinson. (1995). “An Algorithm for Solving Job Shop Scheduling.” Management Science 35, 164–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caseau, Y. and F. Laburthe. (1996). “Improving Branch and Bound for Job-Shop Scheduling with Constraint Propagation. In M. Deza, R. Euler, and Y. Manoussakis (eds.), Proceedings of Combinatorics and Computer Science, CCS'95. Berlin: Springer-Verlag: LNCS 1120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caseau, Y. and F. Laburthe. (1997a). “Solving Small TSPs with Constraints.” In L. Maish (ed.), Logic Programming—Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Logic Programming. Cambridge, MA: The MIT-Press, pp. 316–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caseau, Y. and F. Laburthe. (1997b). “Solving Various Weighted Matching Problems with Constraints.” In G. Smolka (ed.), Principle and Practice of Constraint Programming—CP97. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 17–31. LNCS 1330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caseau, Y. and F. Laburthe. (1999). “Heuristics for Large Constrained Routing Problems.” Journal of Heuristics 5, 281–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darbi-Dowman, K. and J. Little. (1998). “Properties of Some Combinatorial Optimization Problems and Their Effect on the Performance of Integer Programming and Constraint Logic Programming.” INFORMS Journal of Computing 10, 276–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Backer, B., V. Furnon, P. Shaw, P. Kilby, and P. Prosser. (2000). “Solving Vehicle Routing Problems Using Constraint Programming and Meta-Heuristics.” Journal of Heuristics 6, 481–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • El Sakkout, H. H. and M. Wallace. (2000). Probe Backtrack Search for Minimal Perturbation in Dynamic Scheduling.” Constraints 5, 359–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahle, T., U. Junker, S.E. Karisch, N. Kohl, M. Sellmann, and B. Vaaben. (2000). “Constraint Programming Based Column Generation for Crew Assignment.” Journal of Heuristics. This issue.

  • Feo, T. and M. Resende. (1995). “Greedy Randomized Adaptive Search Procedures.” Journal of Global Optimization 6, 109–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Focacci, F., F. Laburthe, and A. Lodi. “Local Search and Constraint Programming.” In F. Glover and Kochenberger G. (eds.), Meta Heuristics Handbook, Kluwer Academic Publishers, to appear.

  • Focacci, F., A. Lodi, and M. Milano. (1999a). “Cost-Based Domain Filtering.” In J. Jaffar (ed.), Principle and Practice of Constraint Programming—CP99. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 189–203. LNCS 1713.

    Google Scholar 

  • Focacci, F., A. Lodi, and M. Milano. (1999b). “Solving TSP with Time Windows with Constraints.” In D. De Schreye (ed.), Logic Programming—Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Logic Programming. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT-Press, pp. 515–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Focacci, F., A. Lodi, and M. Milano. (2000). “Cutting Planes in Constraint Programming: An Hybrid Approach.” In R. Dechter (ed.), Principle and Practice of Constraint Programming—CP 2000. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, pp. 187–201. LNCS 1894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajian, M.T., H. El-Sakkout, M. Wallace, J.M. Lever, and E.B. Richards. (1995). “Towards a Closer Integration of Finite Domain Propagation and Simplex-Based Algorithms.” Technical Report, IC-Parc.

  • Harvey, W. and M. Ginsberg. (1995). Limited Discrepancy Search.” In Proceedings of the 14th IJCAI. Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 607–615.

  • Heipcke, S. (1998). “An Example of Integrating Constraint Programming and Mathematical Programming.” Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics 1. http://www.elsevier.com/cas/tree/store/disc/free/endm/.

  • Heipcke, S. (1999). “Comparing Constraint Programming and Mathematical Programming Approaches to Discrete Optimisation—the Change Problem. Annals of Operations Research 50, 581–595.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooker, J.N. (1997). “Constraint Satisfaction Methods for Generating Valid Cuts.” In D.L. Woodruff (ed.), Advances in Computational and Stochastic Optimization, Logic Programming and Heuristic Search. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooker, J.N. and M.A. Osorio. (1997). “Mixed Logical/Linear Programming.” Discrete Applied Mathematics 96, 395–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooker, J.N., G. Ottosson, H. J. Kim, and E.S. Thorsteinsson. (1999). “On Integrating Constraint Propagation and Linear Programming for Combinatorial Optimization.” In Proceedings of the Sixteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Eleventh Conference on on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence— AAAI99. pp. 136–141.

  • ILOG. ILOG Concert 1.0 Reference Manual.

  • ILOG. ILOG Scheduler 4.4 Reference Manual.

  • Kasper, T. (1998). A Unifying Logical Framework for Integer Linear Programming and Finite Domain Constraint Programming. Ph.D. thesis, Fachbereich Informatick, University of Saarlandes, Saarbrüken, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marriott, K. and P.J. Stuckey. (1998). Programming with Constraints. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuijten, W. (1994). Time and Resource Constrainted Scheduling, a Constraint Satisfaction Approach. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuijten, W. and C. Le Pape. (1998). “Constraint Based Job Shop Scheduling with ILOG Scheduler.” Journal of Heuristics 3, 271–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ottosson, G., E.S. Thorsteinsson, and J.N. Hooker. (1999). “Mixed Global Constraints and Inference in Hybrid CLP–IP Solvers.” Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics. 4. http://www.elsevier.com/cas/tree/store/ disc/free/endm/.

  • Ottosson, G. and E.S. Thorsteinsson. (2000). “Linear Relaxation and Reduced Cost Based Propagation of Continuous Variable Subscript.” In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Integration of AI and OR Techniques in Constraint Programming for Combinatorial Optimization Problems—CP-AI-OR-00. pp. 129–138.

  • Pesant, G. and M. Gendreau. (1996). A View of Local Search in Constraint Programming.” In E.C. Freuder (ed.), Principle and Practice of Constraint Programming—CP96. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 353–366. LNCS 1118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Proll, L. and B. Smith. (1998). “Integer Linear Programming and Constraint Programming Approaches to a Template Design Problem. INFORMS Journal of Computing 10, 265–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Refalo, P. (1999). “Tight Cooperation and its Application in Piecewise Linear Optimization.” In J. Jaffar (ed.), Principle and Practice of Constraint Programming—CP'99, LNCS 1713. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 375–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Refalo, P. (2000). Linear Formulation of Constraint Programming Models and Hybrid Solvers. In R. Dechter (ed.), Principle and Practice of Constraint Programming—CP 2000. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. LNCS 1894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Régin, J.C. (1994). “A Filtering Algorithm for Constraints of Difference in CSPs.” In Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence—AAAI94. pp. 362–367.

  • Régin, J.C. (1999). “The Symmetric Alldiff Constraint.” In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence—IJCAI99. pp. 420–425.

  • Rodosek, R., M. Wallace, and M.T. Hajian. (1999). “A New Approach to Integrating Mixed Integer Programming and Constraint Logic Programming.” Annals of Operational Research 86, 63–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, P. (1998). “Using Constraint Programming and Local Search Methods to Solve Vehicle Routing Problems.” In M. Maher and Puget J.-F. (eds.), Principle and Practice of Constraint Programming—CP98. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 417–431. LNCS 1520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B.M., S.C. Brailford, P.M. Hubbard, and H.P. Williams. (1996). “The Progressive Party Problem: Integer Linear Programming and Constraint Programming Compared.” Constraints 1, 119–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Hentenryck, P. (1999). The OPL Optimization Programming Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Hentenryck, P. and J.P. Carillon. (1998). “Generality Versus Specificity: An Experience with AI and OR Techniques.” In Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence—AAAI88. pp. 660–664.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Ingegneria, Università di Ferrara, Via Saragat 1, 44100, Ferrara, Italy;

    Filippo Focacci

  2. ILOG SA 9, Rue de Verdun-94253, Gentilly, France

    Filippo Focacci

  3. D.E.I.S., Università di Bologna, Viale Risorgimento 2, 40136, Bologna, Italy

    Andrea Lodi & Michela Milano

Authors
  1. Filippo Focacci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrea Lodi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michela Milano
    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

Focacci, F., Lodi, A. & Milano, M. Mathematical Programming Techniques in Constraint Programming: A Short Overview. Journal of Heuristics 8, 7–17 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013653332557

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013653332557

Search

Navigation