Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Scheduling projects with multi-skilled personnel by a hybrid MILP/CP benders decomposition algorithm

  • Published:
Journal of Scheduling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study an assignment type resource-con- strained project scheduling problem with resources being multi-skilled personnel to minimize the total staffing costs. We develop a hybrid Benders decomposition (HBD) algorithm that combines the complimentary strengths of both mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) and constraint programming (CP) to solve this NP-hard optimization problem. An effective cut-generating scheme based on temporal analysis in project scheduling is devised for resolving resource conflicts. The computational study shows that our hybrid MILP/CP algorithm is both effective and efficient compared to the pure MILP or CP method alone.

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

  • Aksin, O. Z., Karaesmen, F., & Ormeci, E. L. (2006). A review of workforce cross-training in call centers from an operations management perspective. In D. Nembhard (Ed.), Workforce cross training handbook. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baptiste, P., Le Pape, C., & Nuijten, W. (2001). Constraint-based scheduling: applying constraint programming to scheduling problems. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartusch, M., Mohring, R. H., & Randermacher, F. J. (1988). Scheduling project networks with resource constraints and time windows. Annals of Operations Research, 16, 201–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellenguez, O., & Neron, E. (2004). Methods for solving the multi-skill project scheduling problem. In Proceedings of the ninth international workshop on project management and scheduling, Nancy, France.

  • Benders, J. F. (1962). Partition procedures for solving mixed variables programming problems. Numerische Mathematik, 4, 238–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoist, T., Laburthe, F., & Rotternbourg, B. (2001). Lagrange relaxation and constraint programming collaborative schemes for traveling tournament problems. In Integration of AI and OR techniques in constraint.

  • Benoist, T., Gaudin, E., & Rotternbourg, B. (2002). Constraint programming contribution to Benders decomposition: A case study. In The eighth international conference on principles and practice of constraint programming, Ithaca, New York.

  • Bockmayr, A., & Kasper, T. (1998). A unifying framework for integer and finite domain constraint programming. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 10(3), 287–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brucker, P. (2001). Scheduling algorithms. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brucker, P. (2002). Scheduling and constraint propagation. Discrete Applied Mathematicsu, 123(1–3), 227–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brucker, P., & Knust, S. (1998). Solving large-sized resource-constrained project scheduling problems. In J. Weglarz (Ed.), Project scheduling: recent models, algorithms and applications. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brucker, P., & Knust, S. (2000). A linear programming and constraint propagation-based lower bound for the RCPSP. European Journal of Operational Research, 127(2), 335–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brucker, P., & Knust, S. (2003). Lower bounds for resource-constrained project scheduling problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 149, 302–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brucker, P., Drexl, A., Mohring, R. H., Neumann, K., & Pesch, E. (1999). Resource-constrained project scheduling: Notation, classification, models and methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 112(1), 3–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dechter, R., Meiri, I., & Pearl, J. (1991). Temporal constraint networks. Artificial Intelligence, 49(1–3), 61–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dincbas, M., Van Hentenryck, P., Simonis, H., & Aggoun, A. (1988). The constraint logic programming language CHIP. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on fifth generation computer systems.

  • Drexl, A., & Kimms, A. (2001). Optimization guided lower and upper bounds for the resource investment problem. Journal of Operational Research Society, 52, 340–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drexl, A., Juretzka, J., Salewski, F., & Schirmer, A. (1998). New modeling concepts and their impact on resource-constrained project scheduling. In J. Weglarz (Ed.), Project scheduling: recent models, algorithms and applications. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, K., Nemhauser, G., & Trick, M. (2004). CP based branch–and–price. In M. Milano (Ed.), Constraint and integer programming. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eremin, A., & Wallace, M. (2001). Hybrid Benders decomposition algorithms in constraint logic programming. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2239, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Focacci, F., Laborie, P., & Nuijten, W. (2000). Solving scheduling problems with setup times and alternative resources. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on artificial intelligence planning and scheduling.

  • Fox, M. (2006). Planning for mixed discrete continuous domains. In J. C. Beck & B. M. Smith (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science: Vol. 3990. CPAIOR 2006 (p. 2). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M., & Long, D. (2001). Hybrid STAN: Identifying and managing combinatorial optimization sub-problems in planning. In Proceedings of the international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI).

  • Fox, M., & Long, D. (2003). PDDL2.1: An extension to PDDL for expression temporal planning domains. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 20, 61–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, J., & Kurklu, E. (2005). Mixed discrete and continuous algorithms for scheduling airborne astronomy observations. In R. Batak & M. Milano (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science: Vol. 3524. CPAIOR 2005 (pp. 183–200). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, W., & Ginsberg, M. (1995). Limited discrepancy search. In The fourteenth international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI-95).

  • Hooker, J. (2000). Logic-based methods for optimization: combining optimization and constraint satisfaction. New York: Wiley-Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooker, J. (2002). Logic, optimization and constraint programming. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 14(4), 285–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooker, J., & Osorio, M. (1999). Mixed logical-linear programming. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 96–97, 395–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ILOG (2002a). ILOG Solver 5.3 User’s Manual.

  • ILOG (2002b). ILOG CPLEX 8.1 User’s Manual.

  • ILOG (2002c). OPL Studio 3.6.1 User’s Manual: ILOG, Inc.

  • Jain, V., & Grossmann, I. (2001). Algorithms for hybrid MILP/CP models for a class of optimization problems. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 13(4), 258–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasen, K. (1999). An approximation scheme for bin packing with conflicts. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 3, 363–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joslin, D. E., & Clements, D. P. (1999). “Squeaky Wheel” optimization. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 10, 353–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasdon, L. S. (1970). Optimization theory for large systems. New York: Macmillan Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, H., & Womer, K. (2006a). Determining crew composition for a new technology (Working Paper).

  • Li, H., & Womer, K. (2006b). Project scheduling with multi-purpose resources: a combined MILP/CP decomposition approach. International Journal of Operations and Quantitative Management, 12(4), 305–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, H., & Womer, K. (2008). Modeling the supply chain configuration problem under resource constraints. International Journal of Project Management, 26(6), 646–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milano, M., & Trick, M. (2004). Constraint and integer programming. In M. Milano (Ed.), Constraint and integer programming: toward a unified methodology. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemhauser, G., & Wolsey, L. (1988). Integer and combinatorial optimization. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neron, E., Bellenguez, O., & Heurtebise, M. (2006). Decomposition method for solving multi-skill project scheduling problem. In Proceedings of the tenth international workshop on project management and scheduling, Poznan.

  • Neumann, K., Schwindt, C., & Zimmermann, J. (2002). Project scheduling with time windows and scarce resources: temporal and resource-constrained project scheduling with regular and nonregular objective functions. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwindt, C. (1996). Generation of resource-constrained project scheduling problems with minimal and maximal time lags (Technical Report WIOR-489). Institute für Wirtschaftstheorie und Operations Research, University of Karlsruhe.

  • Sellmann, M., & Fahle, T. (2003). Constraint programming based Lagrangian relaxation for the automatic recording problem. Annals of Operations Research, 118, 17–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thesen, A. (1977). Measures of the restrictiveness of project networks. Networks, 7, 193–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorsteinsson, E. S. (2001). Branch–and–check: A hybrid framework integrating mixed integer programming and constraint logic programming. In Proceedings of the seventh international conference on principles and practices of constraint programming (CP-01). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsang, E. (1993). Foundations of constraint satisfaction. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Hentenryck, P. (1999). The OPL optimization programming language. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wah, B. W., & Chen, Y. (2006). Constraint partitioning in penalty formulations for solving temporal planning problems. Artificial Intelligence, 170, 187–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, M., Novello, S., & Schimpf, J. (1997). ECLiPSe: A platform for constraint logic programming. Available from: http://www.icparc.ic.ac.uk/eclipse/reports/eclipse/eclipse.html.

  • Xing, Z., Chen, Y., & Zhang, W. (2006). An efficient hybrid strategy for temporal planning. In J. C. Beck & B. M. Smith (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science: Vol. 3990. CPAIOR 2006 (pp. 273–287). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Business Administration, University of Missouri—St. Louis, One University Blvd., St. Louis, MO, 63121, USA

    Haitao Li & Keith Womer

Authors
  1. Haitao Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keith Womer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haitao Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Li, H., Womer, K. Scheduling projects with multi-skilled personnel by a hybrid MILP/CP benders decomposition algorithm. J Sched 12, 281–298 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-008-0079-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-008-0079-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation