Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Current Approaches for Solving Over-Constrained Problems

  • Published:
Constraints Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We summarize existing approaches to model and solve overconstrained problems. These problems are usually formulated as combinatorial optimization problems, and different specific and generic formalisms are discussed, including the special case of multi-objective optimization. Regarding solving methods, both systematic and local search approaches are considered. Finally we review a number of case studies on overconstrained problems taken from the specialized literature.

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

  1. Abramson, D. A. (1991). Constructing school timetables using simulated annealing: Sequential and parallel algorithms. Management Science, 37(1): 98–113.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Affane, M.-S., & Bennaceu, H. (1998). A weight are consistency technique for Max-CSP. In Proc. of ECAI-98, pages 209–213.

  3. Alvarez-Valdes, R., Martin, G., & Tamarit, J. M. (1996). Constructing good solutions for the Spanish school timetabling problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1203–1215.

  4. Belegundu, A. D., Murthy, D. V., Salagame, & Constant, E. W. (1994). Multi-objective optimization of laminated ceramic composites using genetic algorithms. In Fifth AIAA/USAF/NASA Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, Paper 84-4363-CP, pages 1015–1022.

  5. Bensana, E., Lemaitre, M., & Verfaillie, G. (1999). Earth observation satellite management. Constraints, 4(3): 293–299.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bistarelli, S., Montanari, U., & Rossi, F. (1995). Constraint solving over semirings. In Proc. IJCAI-95, pages 624–630.

  7. Bistarelli, S., Montanari, U., Rossi, F., Schiex, T., Verfaille, G., & Fargier, H. (1999). Semiring-based CSPs and valued CSPs: Frameworks, properties and comparison. Constraints, 4: 199–240.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Borning, A., Freeman-Benson, B., & Wilson, M. (1992). Constraint hierarchies. Lisp and Symbolic Computation, 5: 223–270.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cabon, B., De Givry, S., Lobjois, L., Schiex, T., & Warners, J. (1999). Radio link frequency assignment. Constraints, 4(1): 79–89.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cabon, B., Verfaillie, G., Martinez, D., & Bourret, P. (1996). Using mean field methods for boosting backtrack search in constraint satisfaction problems. In Proc. of ECAI-96, pages 165–169.

  11. Cabon, B., Givry, S., & Verfaillie, G. (1998). Anytime lower bounds for constraint violation minimization problems. In Proc. of CP-98, pages 117–131.

  12. Chu, P., & Beasley, J. E. (1997). Genetic algorithms for the generalized assignment problem. Computers and Operations Research, 24: 17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Colorni, A., Dorigo, & Maniezzo (1992). A genetic algorithm, to solve the timetable problem. Technical Report 90.060, Politecnico di Milano, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Costa, D. (1994). A tabu search algorithm for computing an operational timetable. European Journal of Operational Research, 76: 98–110.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Davenport, A., Tsang, E., Wang, C., & Zhu, K. (1994). GENET: A connectionist architecture for solving constraint satisfaction problems by iterative improvement. In Proc. of AAAI-94, pages 325–330.

  16. Dubois, D., Fargier, H., & Prade, H. (1996). Possibility theory in constraint satisfaction problems: Handling priority, preference and uncertainty. Applied Intelligence, 6: 287–309.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Eiben, A. E., Raua, P.-E., & Ruttkay, Zs. (1994). Solving constraint satisfaction problem using genetic algorithms. In Proc. 1st IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computing, pages 543–547.

  18. Fargier, H., & Lang, J. (1993). Uncertainty in constraint satisfaction problems: A probabilistic approach. In Proc. ECSQARU-93, In Vol. 747 of LNCS, pages 97–104.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fargier, H. (1994). Problemes de satisfaction de constraintes flexibles: Application a l'ordonnancement de production. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France.

  20. Freuder, E., & Wallace, R. (1992). Partial constraint satisfaction. Artificial Intelligence, 58: 21–71.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Givry, S., Verfaillie, G., & Schiex, T. (1997). Bounding the optimum of constraint optimization problems. In Proc. of CP-97, pages 405–419.

  22. Goldberg, D. E. (1989). Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning. Addition-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Haralick, R. M., & Elliot, G. L. (1980). Increasing tree search efficiency for constraint satisfaction problems. Artificial Intelligence, 14: 263–313.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Holland, J. H. (1992). Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems, 2nd ed. MITPress.

  25. Homaifar, A., Lai, S. H. Y., & Qi, X. (1994). Constrained optimization via genetic algorithms. Simulation, 62(4): 242–254.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Horn, J., & Nafpliotis, N. (1993). Multi-objective optimization using the niched pareto genetic algorithm. Technical Report Illi GAI Report 93005, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kang, L., & White, G. M. (1992). A logic approach to the resolution of constraints in timetabling. European Journal of Operational Research, 61: 306–317.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kirkpatrick, S., Gelat, C., & Vicci, M. (1983). Optimization by simulated annealing. Science, 220(4598): 671–680.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Koster, A. M., Hoesel, C. P., & Kolen, A. W. Optimal solutions for a frequency assignment problem via tree-decomposition. In Vol. 1665 of LNCS, pages 338-349.

  30. Kumar, V. (1992). Algorithms for constraint satisfaction problems: A survey. AI Magazine, Spring 1992, pages 32–44.

  31. Lanfear, T. A. (1989). Graph theory and radio link frequency assignment problems. Technical Report, NATO, Allied Radio Frequency.

  32. Larrosa, J. (2000). Boosting search with variable elimination. In Proc. CP-00, pages 291–305.

  33. Larrosa, J., & Meseguer, P. (1996). Exploiting the use of DAC in Max-CSP. In Proc. of CP-96, pages 308–322.

  34. Larrosa, J., & Meseguer, P. (1999). Partition-based lower bound for max-CSP. In Proc. of CP-99, pages 303–315.

  35. Larrosa, J., Meseguer, P., & Schiex, T. (1999). Maintaining reversible DAC for max-CSP. Artificial Intelligence, 107(1): 149–163.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Lau, H. C. (1996). A new approach for weighted constraint satisfaction: Theoretical and computational results. In Proc. of CP-96, pages 323–337.

  37. Lemaitre, M., & Verfaillie, G. (1997). Daily management of an earth observation satellite: comparairon of ILOG solver with dedicated algorithms for Valued CSP. In Proc. of the Third ILOG International Users Meeting. Paris, France.

  38. Li, Y. H. (1997). Directed annealing search in constraint satisfaction and optimization. Ph.D. Thesis, Imperial College of Science, Department of Computing.

  39. Minton, S., Johnson, M., Philips, A., & Laird, P. (1990). Solving large-scale constraint satisfaction and scheduling problems using a heuristic repair method. In Proc. of AAAI-90, pages 17–24.

  40. Minton, S., Johnson, M., Philips, A., & Laird, P. (1992). Minimizing conflicts: A heuristic repair method for constraint satisfaction and scheduling problems. Artificial Intelligence, 58: 161–205.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Morris, P. (1993). The breakout method for escaping from local minima. In Proc. of AAAI-93, pages 40–45.

  42. Neufeld, G. A., & Tartar, J. (1974). Graph coloring conditions for the existence of solutions to the timetable problem. Communications of the ACM, 17(8): 450–453.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Parmee, I. (1989). The integration of evolutionary and adaptive computing technologies with product/ system design and realization. Springer-Verlag, Plymouth, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Régin, J. C., Petit, T., Bessiére, C., & Puget, J. F., (2000). An original constraint based approach for solving over constrained problems. In Proc. CP-00, pages 543–548.

  45. Rosenthal, R. (1985). Principles of multiobjective optimization. Decision Sciences, 16: 133–152.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ruttkay, Z., Eiben, A. E., & Raue, P. E. (1995). Improving the performance of GAs on a GA-hard CSP. In Proceedings, CP95 Workshop on Studying and Solving Really Hard Problems, pages 157–171.

  47. Schaerf, A. (1996). Tabu search techniques for large high-school timetabling problems. In Proc. of ECAI-96, pages 634–639.

  48. Schaerf, A. (1996). A survey of automated timetabling. Artificial Intelligence Review, 13: 87–127.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Schiex, T., Verfaille, G., & Fargier, H. (1995). Valued constraint satisfaction problems: Hard and easy problems. In Proc. IJCAI-95, pages 631–637.

  50. Schiex, T. (2000). Arc consistency for soft constraints. In Proc. CP-2000, pages 411–424.

  51. Srinivas, N., & Deb, K. (1993). Multi-objective optimization using nondominated sorting in genetic algorithms, Technical Report, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur.

  52. Tsang, E. (1993). Foundations of Constraint Satisfaction. Academic Press.

  53. Tsang, E., Wang, C., Davenport, A., Voudouris, C., & Lau, T. (1999). A family of stochastic methods for constraint satisfaction and optimization. In The First International Conference on the Practical Application of Constraint Technologies and Logic Programming, London.

  54. Ulungu, E. L., Teghem, J., & Fortemps, P. H. (1997). Heuristics for multi-objective combinatorial optimization by simulated annealing. In Gu, J., Chen, G., Wei, Q., & Wang, S. (eds.), Multicriteria Analysis, pages 269–278. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Ulungu, E. L., Teghem, J., Fortemps, P. H., & Tuyttens, D. (1999). MOSA method: A tool for solving multi-objective combinatorial optimization problems. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 8(4): 221–236.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Ulungu, E. L., Teghem, J., & Ost, C. (1998). Interactive simulate annealing in a multi-objective framework: Application to an industrial problem. J. Oper. Res. Soc., 49: 1044–1050.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Verfaille, G., & Schiex, T. (1994). Solution reuse in dynamic constraint satisfaction problems. In Proc. of AAAI-94, pages 307–312.

  58. Verfaillie, G., Lemaitre, M., & Schiex, T. (1996). Russian doll search for solving constraint satisfaction problems. In Proc. of AAAI-96, pages 181–187.

  59. Wah, B., & Wang, T. (1999). Simulated annealing with asymptotic convergence for nonlinear constrained global optimization. In Proc. of CP-99, pages 461–475.

  60. Wallace, R. (1995). Directed arc consistency preprocessing. In Meyer, M. (ed.), Selected Papers from the ECAI-94 Workshop on Constraint Processing, Vol. 923 of LNCS, pages 121–137.

  61. Wallace, R. (1996). Enhancements of branch and bound methods for the maximal constraint satisfaction problem. In Proc. of AAAI-96, pages 188–195.

  62. Wallace, R., & Freuder, E. C. (1993). Conjunctive width heuristics for maximal constraint satisfaction. In Proc. of AAAI-93, pages 762–768.

  63. Wallace R., & Freuder, E. C. (1995). Heuristics methods for over-constrained constraint satisfaction problems. In Over-Constrained Systems, Vol. 1106 of LNCS. (Also Workshop in CP-95.)

  64. Wilson, M., & Borning, A. (1993). Hierarchical constraint logic programming. Journal of Logic Programming, 16: 227–318.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Yokoo, M. (1994). Weak-commitment search for solving constraint satisfaction problems. In Proc. of AAAI-94, pages 313–318.

  66. Yoshikawa, M., Kaneko, K., Yamanouchi, T., & Watanabe M. (1996). A constraint-based high school scheduling system. IEEE Expert, 11(1): 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IIIA-CSIC Campus UAB, 08193, Bellaterra, Spain

    Pedro Meseguer

  2. Vesfold University College, N-3103, Tønsberg, Norway

    Noureddine Bouhmala

  3. SGTM-TreeDAlgo, 23 rue Massena, 20100, Casablanca, Maroc

    Taoufik Bouzoubaa

  4. SINTEF Postboks 124 Blindern, N-0314, Oslo, Norway

    Morten Irgens

  5. IIIA-CSIC Campus UAB, 08193, Bellaterra, Spain

    Martí Sánchez

Authors
  1. Pedro Meseguer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Noureddine Bouhmala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Taoufik Bouzoubaa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Morten Irgens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Martí Sánchez
    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

Meseguer, P., Bouhmala, N., Bouzoubaa, T. et al. Current Approaches for Solving Over-Constrained Problems. Constraints 8, 9–39 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021902812784

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021902812784

Search

Navigation