Improved Constraint Propagation via Lagrangian Decomposition

  • David Bergman
  • Andre A. Cire
  • Willem-Jan van HoeveEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9255)


Constraint propagation is inherently restricted to the local information that is available to each propagator. We propose to improve the communication between constraints by introducing Lagrangian penalty costs between pairs of constraints, based on the Lagrangian decomposition scheme. The role of these penalties is to force variable assignments in each of the constraints to correspond to one another. We apply this approach to constraints that can be represented by decision diagrams, and show that propagating Lagrangian cost information can help improve the overall bound computation as well as the solution time.


Constraint Programming Lagrangian Relaxation Binary Decision Diagram Lagrangian Decomposition Optimal Lagrangian Multiplier 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Andersen, H.R., Hadzic, T., Hooker, J.N., Tiedemann, P.: A constraint store based on multivalued decision diagrams. In: Bessière, C. (ed.) CP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4741, pp. 118–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benoist, T., Laburthe, F., Rottembourg, B.: Lagrange relaxation and constraint programming collaborative schemes for traveling tournament problems. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Integration of Artificial Intelligence and Operations Research Techniques in Constraint Programming for Combinatorial Optimization Problems (CPAIOR 2001) (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergman, D., Cire, A.A., van Hoeve, W.J.: Lagrangian Bounds from Decision Diagrams. Constraints 20(3), 346–361 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bergman, D., van Hoeve, W.-J., Hooker, J.N.: Manipulating MDD relaxations for combinatorial optimization. In: Achterberg, T., Beck, J.C. (eds.) CPAIOR 2011. LNCS, vol. 6697, pp. 20–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cire, A.A., van Hoeve, W.J.: Multivalued Decision Diagrams for Sequencing Problems. Operations Research 61(6), 1411–1428 (2013)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cooper, M.C., de Givry, S., Sanchez, M., Schiex, T., Zytnicki, M., Werner, T.: Soft arc consistency revisited. Artificial Intelligence 174(7–8), 449–478 (2010)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Focacci, F., Lodi, A., Milano, M.: Cost-based domain filtering. In: Jaffar, J. (ed.) CP 1999. LNCS, vol. 1713, pp. 189–203. Springer, Heidelberg (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fontaine, D., Michel, L., Van Hentenryck, P.: Constraint-based lagrangian relaxation. In: O’Sullivan, B. (ed.) CP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8656, pp. 324–339. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guignard, M., Kim, S.: Lagrangian Decomposition: A Model Yielding Stronger Lagrangian Bounds. Mathematical Programming 39, 215–228 (1987)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoda, S., van Hoeve, W.-J., Hooker, J.N.: A systematic approach to MDD-based constraint programming. In: Cohen, D. (ed.) CP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6308, pp. 266–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Hoeve, W.J., Katriel, I.: Global constraints. In: Handbook of Constraint Programming, pp. 169–208. Elsevier (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Janssen, P., Jégou, P., Nouguier, B., Vilarem, M.C.: A filtering process for general constraint-satisfaction problems: achieving pairwise-consistency using an associated binary representation. In: IEEE International Workshop on Tools for Artificial Intelligence, Architectures, Languages and Algorithms, pp. 420–427. IEEE (1989)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khemmoudj, M.O.I., Bennaceur, H., Nagih, A.: Combining arc-consistency and dual lagrangean relaxation for filtering CSPS. In: Barták, R., Milano, M. (eds.) CPAIOR 2005. LNCS, vol. 3524, pp. 258–272. Springer, Heidelberg (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lemaréchal, C.: Lagrangian relaxation. In: Jünger, M., Naddef, D. (eds.) Computational Combinatorial Optimization. LNCS, vol. 2241, pp. 112–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Régin, J.-C.: Arc consistency for global cardinality constraints with costs. In: Jaffar, J. (ed.) CP 1999. LNCS, vol. 1713, pp. 390–404. Springer, Heidelberg (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sellmann, M.: Theoretical foundations of cp-based lagrangian relaxation. In: Wallace, M. (ed.) CP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3258, pp. 634–647. Springer, Heidelberg (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Bergman
    • 1
  • Andre A. Cire
    • 2
  • Willem-Jan van Hoeve
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.School of BusinessUniversity of ConnecticutMansfieldUSA
  2. 2.University of Toronto ScarboroughTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Tepper School of BusinessCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations