Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Efficient Bounds Consistency Algorithm for the Global Cardinality Constraint

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Constraints Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous studies have demonstrated that designing special purpose constraint propagators can significantly improve the efficiency of a constraint programming approach. In this paper we present an efficient algorithm for bounds consistency propagation of the generalized cardinality constraint (gcc). Using a variety of benchmark and random problems, we show that on some problems our bounds consistency algorithm can dramatically outperform existing state-of-the-art commercial implementations of constraint propagators for the gcc. We also present a new algorithm for domain consistency propagation of the gcc which improves on the worst-case performance of the best previous algorithm for problems that occur often in applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ahuja, R. K., Magnanti, T. L., & Orlin, J. B. (1993). Network Flows: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications, 1st Edition. Prentice Hall.

  2. Caseau, Y., Guillo, P.-Y., & Levenez, E. (1993). A deductive and object-oriented approach to a complex scheduling problem. In Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases, pages 67–80.

  3. Gabow, H. N., & Tarjan, R. E. (1983). A linear-time algorithm for a special case of disjoint set union. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 246–251.

  4. Hall, P. (1935). On representatives of subsets. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 26–30.

  5. Hopcroft, J., & Karp, R. (1973). An n5/2 algorithm for maximum matchings in bipartite graphs. SIAM J. Comput. 2: 225–231.

    Google Scholar 

  6. ILOG S. A. (1998). ILOG Solver 4.2 user’s manual.

  7. Katriel, I., & Thiel, S. (2003). Fast bound consistency for the global cardinality constraint. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, Kinsale, Ireland, pages 437–451.

  8. Lipski, W., & Preparata, F. P. (1981). Efficient algorithms for finding maximum matchings in convex bipartite graphs and related problems. Acta Inform. 15: 329–346.

    Google Scholar 

  9. López-Ortiz, A., Quimper, C.-G., Tromp, J., & van Beek, P. (2003). A fast and simple algorithm for bounds consistency of the alldifferent constraint. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Acapulco, Mexico, pages 245–250.

  10. Puget, J.-F. (1998). A fast algorithm for the bound consistency of alldiff constraints. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Madison, Wisconsin, pages 359–366.

  11. Quimper, C.-G., López-Ortiz, A., van Beek, P., & Golynski, A. (2004). Improved algorithms for the global cardinality constraint. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, Toronto, Ontario, pages 542–556 (September).

  12. Régin, J.-C. (1994). A filtering algorithm for constraints of difference in CSPs. In Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Seattle, pages 362–367.

  13. Régin, J.-C. (1996). Generalized arc consistency for global cardinality constraint. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Portland, Oregon, pages 209–215.

  14. Régin, J.-C., & Puget, J.-F. (1997). A filtering algorithm for global sequencing constraints. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, Linz, Austria, pages 32–46.

  15. Schulte, C., & Stuckey, P. J. (2001). When do bounds and domain propagation lead to the same search space. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming, Firenze, Italy, pages 115–126.

  16. Stergiou, K., & Walsh, T. (1999). The difference all-difference makes. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Stockholm, pages 414–419.

  17. Tarjan, R. E. (1972). Depth-first search and linear graph algorithms. SIAM J. Comput. 1: 146–160.

    Google Scholar 

  18. van Beek, P., & Wilken, K. (2001). Fast optimal instruction scheduling for single-issue processors with arbitrary latencies. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, Paphos, Cyprus, pages 625–639.

  19. Van Hentenryck, P., Michel, L., Perron, L., & Régin, J.-C. (1999). Constraint programming in OPL. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming, Paris, pages 98–116.

  20. Van Hentenryck, P., Simonis, H., & Dincbas, M. (1992) Constraint satisfaction using constraint logic programming. Artif. Intell. 58: 113–159.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada

    Claude-Guy Quimper, Alexander Golynski, Alejandro López-Ortiz & Peter Van Beek

Authors
  1. Claude-Guy Quimper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander Golynski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alejandro López-Ortiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Peter Van Beek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claude-Guy Quimper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Quimper, CG., Golynski, A., López-Ortiz, A. et al. An Efficient Bounds Consistency Algorithm for the Global Cardinality Constraint. Constraints 10, 115–135 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10601-005-0552-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10601-005-0552-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation