DROPS

Document

DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.5

Transition Dominance in Domain-Independent Dynamic Programming

Authors: J. Christopher Beck, Ryo Kuroiwa, Jimmy H. M. Lee, Peter J. Stuckey, and Allen Z. Zhong

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 340, 31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025)

Abstract

Domain-independent dynamic programming (DIDP) is a model-based paradigm for dynamic programming (DP) that enables users to define DP models based on a state transition system. Heuristic search-based solvers have demonstrated strong performance in solving combinatorial optimization problems. In this paper, we formally define transition dominance in DIDP, where one transition consistently leads to better solutions than another, allowing the search process to safely ignore dominated transitions. To facilitate the efficient use of transition dominance, we introduce an interface for defining transition dominance and propose the use of state functions to cache values, thereby avoiding redundant computations when verifying transition dominance. Experimental results on DP models across multiple problem classes indicate that incorporating transition dominance and state functions yields a 5 to 10 times speed-up on average for different search algorithms within the DIDP framework compared to the baseline.

Cite as

J. Christopher Beck, Ryo Kuroiwa, Jimmy H. M. Lee, Peter J. Stuckey, and Allen Z. Zhong. Transition Dominance in Domain-Independent Dynamic Programming. In 31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 340, pp. 5:1-5:23, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{beck_et_al:LIPIcs.CP.2025.5,
  author =	{Beck, J. Christopher and Kuroiwa, Ryo and Lee, Jimmy H. M. and Stuckey, Peter J. and Zhong, Allen Z.},
  title =	{{Transition Dominance in Domain-Independent Dynamic Programming}},
  booktitle =	{31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025)},
  pages =	{5:1--5:23},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-380-5},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{340},
  editor =	{de la Banda, Maria Garcia},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.5},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-238661},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.5},
  annote =	{Keywords: Dominance, Dynamic Programming, Combinatorial Optimization}
}

Document

DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.20

Dependency-Curated Large Neighbourhood Search

Authors: Frej Knutar Lewander, Pierre Flener, and Justin Pearson

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 340, 31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025)

Abstract

In large neighbourhood search (LNS), an incumbent initial solution is incrementally improved by selecting a subset of the variables, called the freeze set, and fixing them to their values in the incumbent solution, while a value for each remaining variable is found and assigned via solving (such as constraint programming-style propagation and search). Much research has been performed on finding generic and problem-specific LNS selection heuristics that select freeze sets that lead to high-quality solutions. In constraint-based local search (CBLS), the relations between the variables via the constraints are fundamental and well-studied, as they capture dependencies of the variables. In this paper, we apply these ideas from CBLS to the LNS context, presenting the novel dependency curation scheme, which exploits them to find a low-cardinality set of variables that the freeze set of any selection heuristic should be a subset of. The scheme often improves the overall performance of generic selection heuristics. Even when the scheme is used with a naïve generic selection heuristic that selects random freeze sets, the performance is competitive with more elaborate generic selection heuristics.

Cite as

Frej Knutar Lewander, Pierre Flener, and Justin Pearson. Dependency-Curated Large Neighbourhood Search. In 31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 340, pp. 20:1-20:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{knutarlewander_et_al:LIPIcs.CP.2025.20,
  author =	{Knutar Lewander, Frej and Flener, Pierre and Pearson, Justin},
  title =	{{Dependency-Curated Large Neighbourhood Search}},
  booktitle =	{31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025)},
  pages =	{20:1--20:17},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-380-5},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{340},
  editor =	{de la Banda, Maria Garcia},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.20},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-238810},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.20},
  annote =	{Keywords: Combinatorial Optimisation, Large Neighbourhood Search (LNS), Constraint-Based Local Search (CBLS)}
}

Document

DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.24

The Work Task Variation Problem

Authors: Mikael Z. Lagerkvist and Magnus Rattfeldt

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 340, 31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025)

Abstract

This paper introduces the Work Task Variation (WTV) problem, a novel scheduling post-processing challenge focused on improving worker shift quality by rearranging tasks within their assigned time slots. The objective is to avoid excessively short or long durations of specific task types, creating smoother and more ergonomic work patterns. We present RosterLogic Variation, a constraint-based local search (CBLS) inspired solver originally developed at Optischedule and successfully deployed in real-world retail settings. This solver rapidly improves existing schedules using tailored invariants and heuristics. We also provide a complete MiniZinc model and a set of generated realistic publicly available benchmark instances. We compare our solver’s performance with that of modern CP solvers using the MiniZinc model. Contemporary state-of-the-art CP solvers are approaching the interactive performance of our CBLS solver for coarse planning, representing a significant advancement since the original design and implementation of our solver.

Cite as

Mikael Z. Lagerkvist and Magnus Rattfeldt. The Work Task Variation Problem. In 31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 340, pp. 24:1-24:23, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{lagerkvist_et_al:LIPIcs.CP.2025.24,
  author =	{Lagerkvist, Mikael Z. and Rattfeldt, Magnus},
  title =	{{The Work Task Variation Problem}},
  booktitle =	{31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025)},
  pages =	{24:1--24:23},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-380-5},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{340},
  editor =	{de la Banda, Maria Garcia},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.24},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-238850},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.24},
  annote =	{Keywords: Constraint-Based Local Search, Constraint Programming, Metaheuristics, Scheduling}
}

Document

DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.23

RPID: Rust Programmable Interface for Domain-Independent Dynamic Programming

Authors: Ryo Kuroiwa and J. Christopher Beck

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 340, 31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025)

Abstract

In domain-independent dynamic programming (DIDP), a problem is formulated as a dynamic programming (DP) model and then solved by a general-purpose solver. In the existing software for DIDP, a model is defined using expressions composed of a predefined set of operations. In this paper, we propose the Rust Programmable Interface for DIDP (RPID), new software for DIDP, where a model is defined by Rust functions. We discuss the design of RPID and compare it with existing DP-based frameworks, including decision diagram-based (DD-based) solvers. In our experiments, RPID is up to hundreds of times faster than the existing DIDP implementation with the same models. In addition, new DIDP models, enabled by the flexibility of RPID, outperform existing models in multiple problem classes. We also show that the relative performance of RPID and existing DD-based solvers depends on problem class with, so far, no clear dominant solver technology.

Cite as

Ryo Kuroiwa and J. Christopher Beck. RPID: Rust Programmable Interface for Domain-Independent Dynamic Programming. In 31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 340, pp. 23:1-23:21, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{kuroiwa_et_al:LIPIcs.CP.2025.23,
  author =	{Kuroiwa, Ryo and Beck, J. Christopher},
  title =	{{RPID: Rust Programmable Interface for Domain-Independent Dynamic Programming}},
  booktitle =	{31st International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2025)},
  pages =	{23:1--23:21},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-380-5},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{340},
  editor =	{de la Banda, Maria Garcia},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.23},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-238845},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2025.23},
  annote =	{Keywords: Decision Diagrams \& Dynamic Programming, Modelling \& Modelling Languages}
}

Document

DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2025.29

Reencoding Unique Literal Clauses

Authors: Aeacus Sheng, Joseph E. Reeves, and Marijn J. H. Heule

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 341, 28th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2025)

Abstract

We present a lightweight reencoding technique that augments propositional formulas containing implicit or explicit exactly-one constraints with auxiliary variables derived from the order encoding. Our approach is based on the observation that many formulas contain clauses where each literal appears only in that clause, and that these unique literal clauses can be replaced by the corresponding sequential counter encoding of exactly-one constraints, which introduces the same variables as the order encoding. We implemented the reencoding in the state-of-the-art SAT solver CaDiCaL with support for proof logging and solution reconstruction. Experiments on SAT Competition benchmarks demonstrate that our technique enables solving dozens of additional formulas. We found that shuffling a formula before reencoding harms performance. To mitigate this issue, we introduce a method that sorts literals within clauses based on the formula structure before applying our reencoding. The same technique also predicts whether reencoding is likely to yield improvements.

Cite as

Aeacus Sheng, Joseph E. Reeves, and Marijn J. H. Heule. Reencoding Unique Literal Clauses. In 28th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 341, pp. 29:1-29:21, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{sheng_et_al:LIPIcs.SAT.2025.29,
  author =	{Sheng, Aeacus and Reeves, Joseph E. and Heule, Marijn J. H.},
  title =	{{Reencoding Unique Literal Clauses}},
  booktitle =	{28th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2025)},
  pages =	{29:1--29:21},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-381-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{341},
  editor =	{Berg, Jeremias and Nordstr\"{o}m, Jakob},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2025.29},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-237635},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2025.29},
  annote =	{Keywords: Satisfiability solving, auxiliary variables, graph coloring}
}

Document

Invited Talk

DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2023.1

Beyond Optimal Solutions for Real-World Problems (Invited Talk)

Authors: Maria Garcia de la Banda

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 280, 29th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2023)

Abstract

Combinatorial optimisation technology has come a long way. We now have mature high-level modelling languages in which to specify a model of the particular problem of interest [Nethercote et al., 2007; Frisch et al., 2008; Van Hentenryck, 1999; Fourer et al., 1990]; robust complete solvers in each major constraint paradigm, including Constraint Programming (CP), MaxSAT [Jessica Davies and Fahiem Bacchus, 2011; Alexey Ignatiev et al., 2019], and Mixed Integer Programming (MIP); effective incomplete search techniques that can easily be combined with complete solvers to speed up the search such as Large Neighbourhood Search [Paul Shaw, 1998]; and enough general knowledge about modelling techniques to understand the need for our models to incorporate components such as global constraints [Willem-Jan van Hoeve and Irit Katriel, 2006], symmetry constraints [Ian P. Gent et al., 2006], and more. All this has significantly reduced the amount of knowledge required to apply this technology successfully to the many different combinatorial optimisation problems that permeate our society. And yet, not many organisations use such advanced optimisation technology; instead, they often rely on the solutions provided by problem-specific algorithms that are implemented in traditional imperative languages and lack any of the above advances. Further, while advanced optimisation technology is particularly suitable for the kind of complex human-in-the-loop decision-making problems that occur in critical sectors of our society, including health, transport, energy, disaster management, environment and finance, these decisions are often still made by people with little or no technological support. In this extended abstract I argue that to change this state of affairs, our research focus needs to change from improving the technology on its own, to improving it so that users can better trust, use, and maintain the optimisation systems that we develop with it. The rest of this extended abstract discusses my personal experiences and opinion on these three points. Trust I highlight trust (which focuses on the user’s point of view) rather than trustworthiness (which is a characteristic of the software itself) because I think it is the former rather than the latter that is at stake for the adoption of optimisation technology. One of the biggest hurdles I have found for trust in the context of optimisation systems is for the domain experts to (feel like they) understand the underlying model. While many users will never do (or have to), I believe it is key for domain experts to have a high-level understanding of the constraints in the model, since their (dis)trust will likely spread through the organisation, impacting the adoption of the system. Thanks to the use of high-level modelling languages in CP, our group has achieved this [Matthias Klapperstueck et al., 2023] by documenting the constraints in a language the user knows (mathematics) and linking each constraint to the particular part of the model that implements it (via comments). While domain experts do not completely understand the model, the similarity between the format they understand (mathematics) and the model constraint has helped them verify our perception of their problem and improved their trust in the model. However, more needs to be done in this direction via the development of formal techniques. For example, our group is exploring the use of domain-specific languages [Hudak, 1997] as a bridge between domain experts and modellers that helps both trust and maintenance (see later). This [Sameela Suharshani Wijesundara et al., 2023] and other approaches need to be explored. A very significant source of trust for our domain experts (and of trustworthiness for the software) has been the development of two different models implemented by two different people for the same problem [Matthias Klapperstueck et al., 2023]. While this can be seen as a prohibitively expensive exercise, it did not take that long once the first model was mature, is a good way to onboard new optimisation team members, and has helped up detect not only bugs but also differences in the interpretation of domain expert information. For optimisation problems where it is not possible to verify the optimality (or even correctness) of the solution, we see such redundant modelling as the only solution for now. Interestingly, a significant step forward in obtaining the trust of our domain experts has been the generation of an optimality gap whenever an optimal solution could not be found due to time constraints. While explaining this concept took time, once understood it has boosted their trust, particularly when tackling problems where the solution is not easy verifiable or when approximated models/data are used (needed for speed, see later). This makes it difficult to work with CP and SAT solvers, as they usually lack tight lower bounds. Finally, trust is often developed through the use of the system, which I discuss below. Use Usability is known to be key for the deployment of software systems. By "system" in our context, I refer to the combination of the problem model(s), the associated solver(s) and, importantly, the User Interface (UI) that often integrates them and is fundamental to their success. In addition to the traditional usability characteristics of software systems, I believe an optimisation system requires particular care in the following areas. Interaction, i.e., the system must allow users to interact with the UI not only to provide and modify the input data, but also to modify the constraints (at the very least by turning some on/off) as well as explore and compare solutions, as argued in [David Meignan et al., 2015; Jie Liu et al., 2021]. Incremental compilers and solvers would significantly help in making this easier, as well as generic ways for the UIs to communicate with them. Conflict resolution, that is, ensuring the system can not only detect infeasible instances, but also support users in understanding the data/constraints that cause infeasibility and how to modify the instance to make it feasible. Any interactive optimisation system that has users, will likely have conflicts. Thus, it is mandatory for CP to improve its conflict resolution technology which, while existent [João Marques-Silva and Alessandro Previti, 2014; Lauffer and Topcu, 2019; Ilankaikone Senthooran et al., 2023], is not widespread and it is often still problem-dependent, overwhelming (in the number of constraints shown to the user) and slow. Without it, users will be "stumped" when (rather than if) infeasibility is reached. Solution diversity, that is, supporting users in obtaining a diverse set of (close-to-optimal) solutions, where diversity is measured by a user-provided metric modelled somehow. While some solver-independent technology has been developed and implemented for this [Emmanuel Hebrard et al., 2005; Thierry Petit and Andrew C. Trapp, 2015; Linnea Ingmar et al., 2020], it should be easier to use and more widespread. Further, it requires sophisticated solution comparison capabilities and, importantly, for optimal solutions to be found in seconds rather than hours. This brings me to speed, an area where CP solvers are falling behind. Most of our research group applications now use MIP solvers due to the need for floats (which precludes us from using learning solvers such as Chuffed [Geoffrey Chu, 2013]), but also to the lack of effective warm-start processes that are available in MIP solvers. Interestingly, data and model approximations have been proved to achieve orders of magnitude speedups with small reductions in optimality [Matthias Klapperstueck et al., 2023]. Developing generic (i.e., problem independent) accurate approximations would be extremely useful for complex decision systems. Other areas where I think generic CP methods are worth investigating more include dealing with uncertainty and online problems, ensuring solution fairness (even if it is over time), and studying predict + optimise approaches. Maintain I know very few papers devoted to the issue of maintenance in optimisation technology. While this may be due to my lack of knowledge, I suspect it is also due to the limited adoption of optimisation technology. While the issues in this area are again common to other software systems, I believe the solutions for CP require special attention. For example, the issue of changes in user requirements (that our research group calls problem drift) seems particularly prevalent in decision-making systems, as such problems can evolve rapidly due to unforeseen circumstances. This can make optimisation systems obsolete faster than expected. Our research group has proposed to tackle problem drift by developing a requirements model implemented in the above-mentioned MDSLs and created by both domain experts and modellers that, when modified re-generates parts of the model to support the modifications [Sameela Suharshani Wijesundara et al., 2023]. This and other approaches such as the creation of reusable models components [Sophia Saller and Jana Koehler, 2022; Toby Walsh, 2003], or instantiatable classes for common problem domains, are worth investigating.

Cite as

Maria Garcia de la Banda. Beyond Optimal Solutions for Real-World Problems (Invited Talk). In 29th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2023). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 280, pp. 1:1-1:4, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{garciadelabanda:LIPIcs.CP.2023.1,
  author =	{Garcia de la Banda, Maria},
  title =	{{Beyond Optimal Solutions for Real-World Problems}},
  booktitle =	{29th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2023)},
  pages =	{1:1--1:4},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-300-3},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2023},
  volume =	{280},
  editor =	{Yap, Roland H. C.},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2023.1},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-190384},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2023.1},
  annote =	{Keywords: Combinatorial optimisation systems, usability, trust, maintenance}
}

Document

DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.24

Heuristics for MDD Propagation in HADDOCK

Authors: Rebecca Gentzel, Laurent Michel, and Willem-Jan van Hoeve

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 235, 28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022)

Abstract

Haddock, introduced in [R. Gentzel et al., 2020], is a declarative language and architecture for the specification and the implementation of multi-valued decision diagrams. It relies on a labeled transition system to specify and compose individual constraints into a propagator with filtering capabilities that automatically deliver the expected level of filtering. Yet, the operational potency of the filtering algorithms strongly correlate with heuristics for carrying out refinements of the diagrams. This paper considers how to empower Haddock users with the ability to unobtrusively specify various such heuristics and derive the computational benefits of exerting fine-grained control over the refinement process.

Cite as

Rebecca Gentzel, Laurent Michel, and Willem-Jan van Hoeve. Heuristics for MDD Propagation in HADDOCK. In 28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 235, pp. 24:1-24:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{gentzel_et_al:LIPIcs.CP.2022.24,
  author =	{Gentzel, Rebecca and Michel, Laurent and van Hoeve, Willem-Jan},
  title =	{{Heuristics for MDD Propagation in HADDOCK}},
  booktitle =	{28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022)},
  pages =	{24:1--24:17},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-240-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2022},
  volume =	{235},
  editor =	{Solnon, Christine},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.24},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-166534},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.24},
  annote =	{Keywords: Decision Diagrams}
}

Document

DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.26

From Cliques to Colorings and Back Again

Authors: Marijn J. H. Heule, Anthony Karahalios, and Willem-Jan van Hoeve

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 235, 28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022)

Abstract

We present an exact algorithm for graph coloring and maximum clique problems based on SAT technology. It relies on four sub-algorithms that alternatingly compute cliques of larger size and colorings with fewer colors. We show how these techniques can mutually help each other: larger cliques facilitate finding smaller colorings, which in turn can boost finding larger cliques. We evaluate our approach on the DIMACS graph coloring suite. For finding maximum cliques, we show that our algorithm can improve the state-of-the-art MaxSAT-based solver IncMaxCLQ, and for the graph coloring problem, we close two open instances, decrease two upper bounds, and increase one lower bound.

Cite as

Marijn J. H. Heule, Anthony Karahalios, and Willem-Jan van Hoeve. From Cliques to Colorings and Back Again. In 28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 235, pp. 26:1-26:10, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{heule_et_al:LIPIcs.CP.2022.26,
  author =	{Heule, Marijn J. H. and Karahalios, Anthony and van Hoeve, Willem-Jan},
  title =	{{From Cliques to Colorings and Back Again}},
  booktitle =	{28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022)},
  pages =	{26:1--26:10},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-240-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2022},
  volume =	{235},
  editor =	{Solnon, Christine},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.26},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-166558},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.26},
  annote =	{Keywords: Graph coloring, maximum clique, Boolean satisfiability}
}

Document

DOI: 10.4230/DagRep.8.2.26

Planning and Operations Research (Dagstuhl Seminar 18071)

Authors: J. Christopher Beck, Daniele Magazzeni, Gabriele Röger, and Willem-Jan Van Hoeve

Published in: Dagstuhl Reports, Volume 8, Issue 2 (2018)

Abstract

This report documents the program and the outcomes of Dagstuhl Seminar 18071 "Planning and Operations Research". The seminar brought together researchers in the areas of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Planning, Constraint Programming, and Operations Research. All three areas have in common that they deal with complex systems where a huge space of interacting options makes it almost impossible to humans to take optimal or even good decisions. From a historical perspective, operations research stems from the application of mathematical methods to (mostly) industrial applications while planning and constraint programming emerged as subfields of artificial intelligence where the emphasis was traditionally more on symbolic and logical search techniques for the intelligent selection and sequencing of actions to achieve a set of goals. Therefore operations research often focuses on the allocation of scarce resources such as transportation capacity, machine availability, production materials, or money, while planning focuses on the right choice of actions from a large space of possibilities. While this difference results in problems in different complexity classes, it is often possible to cast the same problem as an OR, CP, or planning problem. In this seminar, we investigated the commonalities and the overlap between the different areas to learn from each other's expertise, bring the communities closer together, and transfer knowledge about solution techniques that can be applied in all areas.

Cite as

J. Christopher Beck, Daniele Magazzeni, Gabriele Röger, and Willem-Jan Van Hoeve. Planning and Operations Research (Dagstuhl Seminar 18071). In Dagstuhl Reports, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp. 26-63, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2018)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@Article{beck_et_al:DagRep.8.2.26,
  author =	{Beck, J. Christopher and Magazzeni, Daniele and R\"{o}ger, Gabriele and Van Hoeve, Willem-Jan},
  title =	{{Planning and Operations Research (Dagstuhl Seminar 18071)}},
  pages =	{26--63},
  journal =	{Dagstuhl Reports},
  ISSN =	{2192-5283},
  year =	{2018},
  volume =	{8},
  number =	{2},
  editor =	{Beck, J. Christopher and Magazzeni, Daniele and R\"{o}ger, Gabriele and Van Hoeve, Willem-Jan},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DagRep.8.2.26},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-92894},
  doi =		{10.4230/DagRep.8.2.26},
  annote =	{Keywords: Artificial Intelligence, Automated Planning and Scheduling, Constraint Programming, Dynamic Programming, Heuristic Search, Mixed Integer Programming, Operations Research, Optimization, Real-world Applications, Reasoning under Uncertainty}
}

9 Search Results for "van Hoeve, Willem-Jan"

Transition Dominance in Domain-Independent Dynamic Programming

Abstract

Cite as

Dependency-Curated Large Neighbourhood Search

Abstract

Cite as

The Work Task Variation Problem

Abstract

Cite as

RPID: Rust Programmable Interface for Domain-Independent Dynamic Programming

Abstract

Cite as

Reencoding Unique Literal Clauses

Abstract

Cite as

Beyond Optimal Solutions for Real-World Problems (Invited Talk)

Abstract

Cite as

Heuristics for MDD Propagation in HADDOCK

Abstract

Cite as

From Cliques to Colorings and Back Again

Abstract

Cite as

Planning and Operations Research (Dagstuhl Seminar 18071)

Abstract

Cite as

Thanks for your feedback!

Could not send message