Advertisement

Constraint Programming for High School Timetabling: A Scheduling-Based Model with Hot Starts

  • Emir Demirović
  • Peter J. Stuckey
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10848)

Abstract

High School Timetabling (HSTT) is a well-known and wide-spread problem. It consists of coordinating resources (e.g. teachers, rooms), times, and events (e.g. classes) with respect to a variety of constraints. In this paper, we study the applicability of constraint programming (CP) for high school timetabling. We formulate a novel CP model for HSTT using a scheduling-based point of view. We show that a drastic improvement in performance over the baseline CP model can be achieved by including solution-based phase saving, which directs the CP solver to first search in close proximity to the best solution found, and our hot start approach, where we use existing heuristic methods to produce a starting point for the CP solver. The experiments demonstrate that our approach outperforms the IP and maxSAT complete methods and provides competitive results when compared to dedicated heuristic solvers.

Keywords

Constraint programming Timetabling Scheduling Modeling Hot start Warm start Local search Phase saving 

References

  1. 1.
    Abío Roig, I.: Solving hard industrial combinatorial problems with SAT (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Global Constraint Catalog: all_equal constraint. http://www.emn.fr/x-info/sdemasse/gccat/Call_equal.html
  3. 3.
    Chu, G.: Improving combinatorial optimization. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Melbourne (2011). http://hdl.handle.net/11343/36679
  4. 4.
    Chu, G., Stuckey, P.J.: LNS = restarts + dynamic search + phase saving. Technical draftGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Demirović, E., Musliu, N.: Modeling high school timetabling as partial weighted maxSAT. In: The 4th Workshop on Logic and Search (LaSh 2014) (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Demirović, E., Musliu, N.: Solving high school timetabling with satisfiability modulo theories. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2014), pp. 142–166 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Demirović, E., Musliu, N.: MaxSAT based large neighborhood search for high school timetabling. Comput. Oper. Res. 78, 172–180 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Demirović, E., Musliu, N.: Modeling high school timetabling as partial weighted maxSAT. In: Technical Draft - Extended LaSh 2014 Workshop Paper (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Global Constraint Catalog: disjunctive constraint. http://www.emn.fr/x-info/sdemasse/gccat/Cdisjunctive.html
  10. 10.
    Dorneles, Á.P., de Araujo, O.C.B., Buriol, L.S.: A fix-and-optimize heuristic for the high school timetabling problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 52, 29–38 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fonseca, G.H.G., Santos, H.G.: Variable neighborhood search based algorithms for high school timetabling. Comput. Oper. Res. 52, 203–208 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    da Fonseca, G.H.G., Santos, H.G., Toffolo, T.Â.M., Brito, S.S., Souza, M.J.F.: GOAL solver: a hybrid local search based solver for high school timetabling. Ann. Oper. Res. 239(1), 77–97 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-014-1685-4MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jacobsen, F., Bortfeldt, A., Gehring, H.: Timetabling at German secondary schools: tabu search versus constraint programming. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2006) (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kheiri, A., Ozcan, E., Parkes, A.J.: HySST: hyper-heuristic search strategies and timetabling. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2012), pp. 497–499 (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kingston, J.: KHE14: an algorithm for high school timetabling. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2014), pp. 498–501 (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kristiansen, S., Sørensen, M., Stidsen, T.R.: Integer programming for the generalized high school timetabling problem. J. Sched. 18(4), 377–392 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lahrichi, A.: Scheduling: the notions of hump, compulsory parts and their use in cumulative problems. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 294, 209–211 (1982)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Luby, M., Sinclair, A., Zuckerman, D.: Optimal speedup of Las Vegas algorithms. Inf. Process. Lett. 47(4), 173–180 (1993)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marte, M.: Towards constraint-based school timetabling. Ann. Oper. Res. (ANOR) 155(1), 207–225 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martins, R., Manquinho, V., Lynce, I.: Open-WBO: a modular MaxSAT solver’. In: Sinz, C., Egly, U. (eds.) SAT 2014. LNCS, vol. 8561, pp. 438–445. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09284-3_33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nethercote, N., Stuckey, P.J., Becket, R., Brand, S., Duck, G.J., Tack, G.: MiniZinc: towards a standard CP modelling language. In: Bessière, C. (ed.) CP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4741, pp. 529–543. Springer, Heidelberg (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74970-7_38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pesant, G.: A regular language membership constraint for finite sequences of variables. In: Wallace, M. (ed.) CP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3258, pp. 482–495. Springer, Heidelberg (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30201-8_36CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pipatsrisawat, K., Darwiche, A.: A lightweight component caching scheme for satisfiability solvers. In: Marques-Silva, J., Sakallah, K.A. (eds.) SAT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4501, pp. 294–299. Springer, Heidelberg (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72788-0_28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Post, G., Ahmadi, S., Daskalaki, S., Kingston, J., Kyngas, J., Nurmi, C., Ranson, D.: An XML format for benchmarks in high school timetabling. Ann. Oper. Res. 194(1), 385–397 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Post, G., Kingston, J.H., Ahmadi, S., Daskalaki, S., Gogos, C., Kyngäs, J., Nurmi, C., Musliu, N., Pillay, N., Santos, H., Schaerf, A.: XHSTT: an XML archive for high school timetabling problems in different countries. Ann. Oper. Res. 218(1), 295–301 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Santos, H.G., Uchoa, E., Ochi, L.S., Maculan, N.: Strong bounds with cut and column generation for class-teacher timetabling. Ann. Oper. Res. 194(1), 399–412 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sørensen, M.: A matheuristic for high school timetabling. In: Timetabling at High Schools, Ph.D. thesis, pp. 137–153. Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark (2013)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sørensen, M., Dahms, F.H.: A two-stage decomposition of high school timetabling applied to cases in Denmark. Comput. Oper. Res. 43, 36–49 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sørensen, M., Kristiansen, S., Stidsen, T.R.: International timetabling competition 2011: an adaptive large neighborhood search algorithm. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2012), pp. 489–492 (2012)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sørensen, M., Stidsen, T.R.: Hybridizing integer programming and metaheuristics for solving high school timetabling. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2014), pp. 557–560 (2014)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sørensen, M., Stidsen, T.R., Kristiansen, S.: Integer programming for the generalized (high) school timetabling problem. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2014), pp. 498–501 (2014)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sørensen, M., Stidsen, T.R.: High school timetabling: modeling and solving a large number of cases in Denmark. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Practice and Theory of Automated Timetabling (PATAT 2012), pp. 359–364 (2012)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sørensen, M., Stidsen, T.R.: Comparing solution approaches for a complete model of high school timetabling. Technical report, DTU Management Engineering (2013)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Valouxis, C., Housos, E.: Constraint programming approach for school timetabling. Comput. Oper. Res. 30(10), 1555–1572 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computing and Information SystemsUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations