Constraint Propagation and Decomposition Techniques for Highly Disjunctive and Highly Cumulative Project Scheduling Problems

In recent years, constraint satisfaction techniques have been successfully applied to “disjunctive” scheduling problems, i.e., scheduling problems where each resource can execute at most one activity at a time. Less significant and less generally applicable results have been obtained in the area of “cumulative” scheduling. Multiple constraint propagation algorithms have been developed for cumulative resources but they tend to be less uniformly effective than their disjunctive counterparts. Different problems in the cumulative scheduling class seem to have different characteristics that make them either easy or hard to solve with a given technique. The aim of this paper is to investigate one particular dimension along which problems differ. Within the cumulative scheduling class, we distinguish between “highly disjunctive” and “highly cumulative” problems: a problem is highly disjunctive when many pairs of activities cannot execute in parallel, e.g., because many activities require more than half of the capacity of a resource; on the contrary, a problem is highly cumulative if many activities can effectively execute in parallel. New constraint propagation and problem decomposition techniques are introduced with this distinction in mind. This includes an O(n2) “edge-finding” algorithm for cumulative resources (where n is the number of activities requiring the same resource) and a problem decomposition scheme which applies well to highly disjunctive project scheduling problems. Experimental results confirm that the impact of these techniques varies from highly disjunctive to highly cumulative problems. In the end, we also propose a refined version of the “edge-finding” algorithm for cumulative resources which, despite its worst case complexity in O(n3) , performs very well on highly cumulative instances.

[1]  Eric Pinson,et al.  A Practical Use of Jackson''s Preemptive Schedule for Solving the Job-Shop Problem. Annals of Opera , 1991 .

[2]  François Laburthe,et al.  Cumulative Scheduling with Task Intervals , 1996, JICSLP.

[3]  Philippe Baptiste,et al.  Satisfiability tests and time‐bound adjustmentsfor cumulative scheduling problems , 1999, Ann. Oper. Res..

[4]  Wpm Wim Nuijten,et al.  Time and resource constrained scheduling : a constraint satisfaction approach , 1994 .

[5]  Erik Demeulemeester,et al.  A branch-and-bound procedure for the multiple resource-constrained project scheduling problem , 1992 .

[6]  Philippe Baptiste,et al.  Constraint Propagation Techniques for Disjunctive Scheduling: The Preemptive Case , 1996, ECAI.

[7]  Michel Minoux,et al.  Graphs and Algorithms , 1984 .

[8]  William J. Cook,et al.  A Computational Study of the Job-Shop Scheduling Problem , 1991, INFORMS Journal on Computing.

[9]  James H. Patterson,et al.  A Comparison of Exact Approaches for Solving the Multiple Constrained Resource, Project Scheduling Problem , 1984 .

[10]  Peter Brucker,et al.  A branch and bound algorithm for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[11]  Philippe Baptiste,et al.  A Theoretical and Experimental Comparison of Constraint Propagation Techniques for Disjunctive Scheduling , 1995, IJCAI.

[12]  Claude Le Pape,et al.  Implementation of resource constraints in ILOG SCHEDULE: a library for the development of constraint-based scheduling systems , 1994 .

[13]  Eric Pinson,et al.  Jackson's Pseudo Preemptive Schedule for the Pm/ri, qi/Cmax scheduling problem , 1998, Ann. Oper. Res..

[14]  A. A. Mastor,et al.  An Experimental Investigation and Comparative Evaluation of Production Line Balancing Techniques , 1970 .

[15]  Willy Herroelen,et al.  Assembly line balancing by resource-constrained project scheduling techniques - A critical appraisal , 1996 .

[16]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[17]  Amedeo Cesta,et al.  Gaining efficiency and flexibility in the simple temporal problem , 1996, Proceedings Third International Workshop on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME '96).

[18]  J. Carlier,et al.  Une méthode arborescente pour résoudre les problèmes cumulatifs , 1991 .

[19]  Yves Colombani Constraint Programming: an Efficient and Practical Approach to Solving the Job-Shop Problem , 1996, CP.

[20]  Nicolas Beldiceanu,et al.  Extending CHIP in order to solve complex scheduling and placement problems , 1993, JFPL.

[21]  J. Erschler,et al.  Ordonnancement de tâches sous contraintes: une approche énergetique , 1992 .

[22]  François Laburthe,et al.  Improved CLP Scheduling with Task Intervals , 1994, ICLP.

[23]  Rainer Kolisch,et al.  Characterization and generation of a general class of resource-constrained project scheduling problems , 1995 .

[24]  Olivier Lhomme,et al.  Consistency Techniques for Numeric CSPs , 1993, IJCAI.

[25]  François Laburthe,et al.  Disjunctive Scheduling with Task Intervals , 1995 .