Document Open Access Logo

Black-Box Value Heuristics for Solving Optimization Problems with Constraint Programming (Short Paper)

Authors Augustin Delecluse , Pierre Schaus

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.CP.2024.36.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.18 MB
  • 12 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Augustin Delecluse
  • TRAIL, ICTEAM, UCLouvain, Belgium
Pierre Schaus
  • ICTEAM, UCLouvain, Belgium

Funding

  • Delecluse, Augustin: This work was supported by Service Public de Wallonie Recherche under grant n°2010235 – ARIAC by DIGITALWALLONIA4.A.

Cite As Get BibTex

Augustin Delecluse and Pierre Schaus. Black-Box Value Heuristics for Solving Optimization Problems with Constraint Programming (Short Paper). In 30th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 307, pp. 36:1-36:12, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2024.36

Abstract

Significant research efforts have focused on black-box variable selection, with less attention given to value heuristics. An ideal value heuristic enables depth-first-search to prioritize high-quality solutions first. The Bound-Impact Value Selection achieves this goal through a look-ahead strategy, trying every value of the selected variable and ranking them based on their impact on the objective. However, this method is generally too computationally intensive for the entire search tree. We introduce two simple yet powerful modifications to improve its scalability. First, a lighter fix point computation involving only the constraints on the shortest path in the constraint graph between the variable and the objective. Second, a reverse look-ahead strategy optimistically fixes the objective variable to its minimum in order to prioritize the remaining values. These two ideas have been empirically validated on a range of academic problems and in the XCSP³ competition, demonstrating significant improvements in scalability.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Constraint and logic programming
Keywords
  • Constraint Programming
  • Value Selection
  • Look-Ahead
  • Optimization

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

Supplementary Materials

References

  1. QAPLIB-Problem Instances and Solutions endash COR@L, April 2024. [Online; accessed 5. Apr. 2024]. URL: https://coral.ise.lehigh.edu/data-sets/qaplib/qaplib-problem-instances-and-solutions.
  2. David Applegate, Robert Bixby, Vašek Chvátal, and William Cook. Finding cuts in the tsp (a preliminary report), 1995. Google Scholar
  3. Gilles Audemard, Christophe Lecoutre, and Emmanuel Lonca. Proceedings of the 2023 xcsp3 competition. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.05877, 2023. Google Scholar
  4. Gilles Audemard, Christophe Lecoutre, and Charles Prud'Homme. Guiding backtrack search by tracking variables during constraint propagation. In International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2023. Google Scholar
  5. Roman Barták. Constraint programming: In pursuit of the holy grail. In Proceedings of the Week of Doctoral Students (WDS99), volume 4, pages 555-564. MatFyzPress Prague, 1999. Google Scholar
  6. Timo Berthold. Measuring the impact of primal heuristics. Operations Research Letters, 41(6):611-614, 2013. Google Scholar
  7. Frédéric Boussemart, Fred Hemery, Christophe Lecoutre, and Lakhdar Sais. Boosting systematic search by weighting constraints. In ECAI, volume 16, page 146, 2004. Google Scholar
  8. Frédéric Boussemart, Christophe Lecoutre, Gilles Audemard, and Cédric Piette. Xcsp3: an integrated format for benchmarking combinatorial constrained problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.03398, 2016. Google Scholar
  9. Quentin Cappart, Thierry Moisan, Louis-Martin Rousseau, Isabeau Prémont-Schwarz, and Andre A Cire. Combining reinforcement learning and constraint programming for combinatorial optimization. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 35, pages 3677-3687, 2021. Google Scholar
  10. Rina Dechter and Judea Pearl. Network-based heuristics for constraint-satisfaction problems. Artificial intelligence, 34(1):1-38, 1987. Google Scholar
  11. Emir Demirović, Geoffrey Chu, and Peter J Stuckey. Solution-based phase saving for cp: A value-selection heuristic to simulate local search behavior in complete solvers. In Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming: 24th International Conference, CP 2018, Lille, France, August 27-31, 2018, Proceedings 24, pages 99-108. Springer, 2018. Google Scholar
  12. Jean-Guillaume Fages and Charles Prud'Homme. Making the first solution good! In 2017 IEEE 29th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI), pages 1073-1077. IEEE, 2017. Google Scholar
  13. Steven Gay, Renaud Hartert, Christophe Lecoutre, and Pierre Schaus. Conflict ordering search for scheduling problems. In Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming: 21st International Conference, CP 2015, Cork, Ireland, August 31-September 4, 2015, Proceedings 21, pages 140-148. Springer, 2015. Google Scholar
  14. P.A. Geelen. Dual viewpoint heuristics for binary constraint satisfaction problems. In Proceedings of ECAI'92, pages 31-35, 1992. Google Scholar
  15. Diarmuid Grimes, Emmanuel Hebrard, and Arnaud Malapert. Closing the open shop: Contradicting conventional wisdom. In International conference on principles and practice of constraint programming, pages 400-408. Springer, 2009. Google Scholar
  16. Robert M Haralick and Gordon L Elliott. Increasing tree search efficiency for constraint satisfaction problems. Artificial intelligence, 14(3):263-313, 1980. Google Scholar
  17. Robert Klein and Armin Scholl. Computing lower bounds by destructive improvement: An application to resource-constrained project scheduling. European Journal of Operational Research, 112(2):322-346, 1999. Google Scholar
  18. Philippe Laborie. Objective landscapes for constraint programming. In Integration of Constraint Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Operations Research: 15th International Conference, CPAIOR 2018, Delft, The Netherlands, June 26-29, 2018, Proceedings 15, pages 387-402. Springer, 2018. Google Scholar
  19. Christophe Lecoutre. Ace, a generic constraint solver. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.05405, 2023. Google Scholar
  20. Christophe Lecoutre, Lakhdar Saïs, Sébastien Tabary, and Vincent Vidal. Reasoning from last conflict (s) in constraint programming. Artificial Intelligence, 173(18):1592-1614, 2009. Google Scholar
  21. Hongbo Li, Minghao Yin, and Zhanshan Li. Failure based variable ordering heuristics for solving csps (short paper). In 27th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2021). Schloss-Dagstuhl-Leibniz Zentrum für Informatik, 2021. Google Scholar
  22. Tom Marty, Tristan François, Pierre Tessier, Louis Gautier, Louis-Martin Rousseau, and Quentin Cappart. Learning a Generic Value-Selection Heuristic Inside a Constraint Programming Solver. In Roland H. C. Yap, editor, 29th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2023), volume 280 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 25:1-25:19, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2023. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2023.25.
  23. Laurent Michel, Pierre Schaus, and Pascal Van Hentenryck. Minicp: a lightweight solver for constraint programming. Mathematical Programming Computation, 13(1):133-184, 2021. Google Scholar
  24. Laurent Michel and Pascal Van Hentenryck. Activity-based search for black-box constraint programming solvers. In Integration of AI and OR Techniques in Constraint Programming for Combinatorial Optimization Problems: 9th International Conference, CPAIOR 2012, Nantes, France, May 28-June1, 2012. Proceedings 9, pages 228-243. Springer, 2012. Google Scholar
  25. Gilles Pesant. From support propagation to belief propagation in constraint programming. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 66:123-150, 2019. Google Scholar
  26. Charles Prud'homme and Jean-Guillaume Fages. Choco-solver: A java library for constraint programming. Journal of Open Source Software, 7(78):4708, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04708.
  27. Philippe Refalo. Impact-based search strategies for constraint programming. In Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming-CP 2004: 10th International Conference, CP 2004, Toronto, Canada, September 27-October 1, 2004. Proceedings 10, pages 557-571. Springer, 2004. Google Scholar
  28. Gerhard Reinelt. TSPLIB-a traveling salesman problem library. ORSA Journal on Computing, 3(4):376-384, 1991. Google Scholar
  29. Christian Schulte, Guido Tack, and Mikael Z Lagerkvist. Modeling and programming with gecode. Schulte, Christian and Tack, Guido and Lagerkvist, Mikael, 1, 2010. Google Scholar
  30. Eva Vallada, Rubén Ruiz, and Jose M Framinan. New hard benchmark for flowshop scheduling problems minimising makespan. European Journal of Operational Research, 240(3):666-677, 2015. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact