Abstract

Weighted constraint satisfaction problems (WCSPs) is a well-known framework for combinatorial optimization problems with several domains of application. In the last few years, several local consistencies for WCSPs have been proposed. Their main use is to embed them into a systematic search, in order to detect and prune unfeasible values as well as to anticipate the detection of deadends. Some of these consistencies rely on an order among variables but nothing is known about which orders are best. Therefore, current implementations use the lexicographic order by default. In this paper we analyze the effect of heuristic orders at three levels of increasing overhead: i) compute the order prior to search and keep it fixed during the whole solving process (we call this a static order), ii) compute the order at every search node using current subproblem information (we call this a dynamic order) and iii) compute a sequence of different orders at every search node and sequentially enforce the local consistency for each one (we call this dynamic re-ordering). We performed experiments in three different problems: Max-SAT, Max-CSP and warehouse location problems. We did not find an alternative better than the rest for all the instances. However, we found that inverse degree (static order), sum of unary weights (dynamic order) and re-ordering with the sum of unary weights are good heuristics which are always better than a random order.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.