Speeding up constraint propagation by redundant modeling

  • B. M. W. Cheng
  • J. H. M. Lee
  • J. C. K. Wu
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1118)


The paper describes a simple modeling and programming approach for speeding up constraint propagation. The idea, although similar to redundant constraints, is based on the concept of redundant modeling. We define CSP model and model redundancy formally, and show how mutually redundant models can be combined and connected using channeling constraints. The combined model contains the original but redundant models as sub-models. Channeling constraints allow the sub-models to cooperate during constraint-solving by propagating constraints freely amongst the sub-models. This extra level of pruning and propagation activities becomes the source of execution speedup. We apply our method to the design and construction of a real-life nurse rostering system. Experimental results provide empirical evidence in line with our prediction.


Constraint Propagation Redundant Modeling Nurse Rostering 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    P. Baptiste and C. Le Pape. Disjunctive constraints for manufacturing scheduling: Principles and extensions. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Singapore, 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    N. Beldiceanu and E. Contejean. Introducing global constraints in CHIP. Journal of Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 17(7):57–73, 1994.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Bitner and E.M. Reingold. Backtrack programming techniques. Communications of the ACM, 18:651–655, 1985.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    B.M.W. Cheng, J.H.M. Lee, and J.C.K. Wu. A constraint-based nurse rostering system using a redundant modeling approach. Technical report (submitted to the 8th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence), Department of Computer Science and Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1996.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    T.H. Cormen, C.E. Leiserson, and R.L. Rivest. Introduction to Algorithms. The MIT Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Dincbas, H. Simonis, and P. Van Hentenryck. Solving the car-sequencing problem in constraint logic programming. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 290–295, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Dincbas, P. Van Hentenryck, H. Simonis, A. Aggoun, and T. Graf. Applications of CHIP to industrial and engineering problems. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Industrial & Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence & Expert Systems, pages 887–892, 1988.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Dincbas, P. Van Hentenryck, H. Simonis, A. Aggoun, T. Graf, and F. Berthier. The constraint logic programming language CHIP. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Systems (FGCS'88), pages 693–702, Tokyo, Japan, December 1988.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. Gervet. Conjunto: Constraint logic programming with finite set domains. In Logic Programming: Proceedings of the 1994 International Symposium, pages 339–358, 1994.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R.M. Haralick and G.L. Elliot. Increasing tree search efficiency for constraint satisfaction problems. Artificial Intelligence, 14:263–313, 1980.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ILOG. ILOG: Solver Reference Manual Version 3.0, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    V. Kumar. Algorithms for constraint-satisfaction problems: A survey. AI Magazine, 13:32–44, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Le Pape. Implementation of resource constraints in Ilog schedule: A library for the development of constraint-based scheduling systems. Intelligent Systems Engineering, 3:55–66, 1994.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C. Le Pape. Resource constraints in a library for constraint-based scheduling. In Proceedings of the INRIA/IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, Paris, France, 1995.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. Liu and K. Sycara. Emergent constraint satisfaction through multi-agent coordinated interaction. In Proceedings of MAAMAW'93, Neuchatel, Switzerland, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A.K. Mackworth. Consistency in networks of relations. AI Journal, 8(1):99–118, 1977.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. Marti and M. Rueher. A distributed cooperating constraints solving system. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, 4(1&2):93–113, 1995.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. Minton, M.D. Johnston, A.B. Philips, and P. Laird. Minimizing conflicts: a heuristic repair method for constraint satisfaction and scheduling. Artificial Intelligence, 58:161–205, 1992.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    B.A. Nadel. Constraint satisfaction algorithms. Computational Intelligence, 5:188–224, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Perrett. Using constraint logic programming techniques in container port planning. ICL Technical Journal, 7(3):537–545, May 1991.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    E.P.K. Tsang. Foundations of Constraint Satisfaction. Academic Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    P. Van Hentenryck. Constraint Satisfaction in Logic Programming. The MIT Press, 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. M. W. Cheng
    • 1
  • J. H. M. Lee
    • 1
  • J. C. K. Wu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatin, N.T.Hong Kong

Personalised recommendations