DOCSLIB.ORG

Using Constraint Programming to Reason on Feature Models £

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Using Constraint Programming to Reason on Feature Models £ Using Constraint Programming to Reason on Feature Models £ David Benavides, Pablo Trinidad, Antonio Ruiz-Cort´es Dpto. de Lenguajes y Sistemas Inform´aticos University of Seville Av. de la Reina Mercedes S/N, 41012 Seville, Spain benavides, trinidad, aruiz @tdg.lsi.us.es Abstract The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, we add parameters to feature models and these parameters are taken Feature models have been cited as one of the main con- into account in the reasoning process. Second, we describe tributions to model software product families. However, how a feature model can be mapped onto a constraint satis- there is still a gap in product family engineering which is faction problem which allows make questions on the feature µ the automated reasoning on feature models. In this paper models, such as how many potential products a model has µ we describe how to reason on feature models using con- which is the the resulting model after applying a filter µ straint programming. Although, there are a few attempts (e.g. users constraints) to a model, which are the prod- µ Ú µ to reason on feature models there are two main drawbacks ucts of a model, Ú is it a valid model, or which is the µ in these proposals: none of them associate parameters best product from a model according to a criterion. µ to features none of them use constraint programming as The remainder of this paper is structured as follow. In the reasoning base. Using constraint programming endows Section 2, we describe how to include parameters into fea- our proposal with a more powerful reasoning capacity and ture models. In Section 3, we improve current reasoning on greater expressiveness than others. feature models. Thus, we give some definitions to be able to automatically answer to several questions about extended feature models. In Section 4, we compare our proposal re- garding to others and we show how our approach can be 1 Introduction used to obtain both variability and commonality informa- tion from a feature model. In Section 5, a running prototype Most of the existing methods [3, 4] for Software Product implementation of our proposal is briefly described. Finally, Line(SPL) engineering consider that designing a compact we give some conclusion and future work in Section 6. model that represents all the possible products is an essen- tial activity. In this context feature models [5, 9, 10, 15] 2 Adding Parameters to Feature Models have been cited as one of the most important contributions of SPL modeling [5, pag.82]. Feature models are used to 2.1 Feature Models model SPL in terms of features and relations among them. In these type of models, the number of potential products The main goal of feature modeling is to identify com- of a SPL may increases with the number of features. Thus, monalities and differences among all products of a SPL. a big number of features may lead to have SPLs with a big One of the main outputs of this activity is a compact repre- number of potential products. That is way, automated rea- sentation of all potential products of a SPL, hereafter called soning on feature models is one of the main challenges. ”feature model” (FM). FMs are used to model SPL in terms On the other hand, constraint programming, as a way of features and relations among them. Roughly speaking, a of reasoning, has been an active field of research in the re- feature is a distinctive characteristic of a product. Depend- cent decades. In this paper we propose using constraint pro- ing on the development stage, it may refer to a requirement, gramming to reason on feature models. To the best of our a component in an architecture or even to pieces of code knowledge, it has not been proposed up to now. [12] of a SPL. £ There are several notations to design FMs [5, 9, 10, 15]. This is a improved version of [2]. This work was partially funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology under grant TIC2003- We found the proposed by Czarnecki as the most compre- 02737-C02-01 (AgilWeb) and PRO-45-2003 (FAMILIES) hensible and flexible and also it is one of the most cited [5]. Figure 1 depicts the FM of JAMES [8] using Czarneky’s no- composed by one or more values of other parameters tation. JAMES is a framework to develop web collaborative of the same or different features. systems and it is a good example of a SPL. ¯ Parameter domain: the space of possible values where Czarnecki’s notation proposes four main relations, the parameter takes its values. Every attribute belongs namely: mandatory, optional, alternative and or–relation. to a domain. It is possible to have discrete domains In these relations, there is always a parent feature and one (e.g:integers, booleans, enumerated) or continuous do- (in the case or mandatory and optional) or more (in the case mains (e.g.:reals). Ê of alternative and or–relation) feature’s childs. ½ is an ex- ample of Mandatory relation (Every JAMES product has Every feature of Figure 1 may have associated one or ÓÖ to have the elements which are the base of the prod- more parameters. For instance, consider Ê ÔÓ×ØÓÖ Ý ,it Ê uct to be operative). ¾ is an example of Optional rela- is possible to identify parameters related to it, such as ×Þ tion( there are JAMES products with Web Services Interface Ñ Ü referred to the maximum size of the files that Ï Ë Á ÒØÖ Ê Ê ÔÓ×ØÓÖ Ý ( ) management and other without it). can be uploaded when using (real domain). is an example of Alternative relation(Every JAMES prod- Likewise any of the child features of Å ÓÙÐ × can have Ä È uct can have data base ( ), or user authentica- ÚÖ×ÓÒ referred to the versions of PHP (JAMES is imple- 1 Ê tion, but only one). is an example of an Or–relation(in mented using PHP) that the module requires to work (in- È a JAMES product there are products with È or teger domain). These are examples of basic parameters. Graphical User Interface, or both at the same time). There An example of derived parameter would be the ÚÖ×ÓÒ are also two more relations that are important to underline: parameter of the Å ÓÙÐ × feature due that it depends on requires and excludes relations which have the following the version of the modules selected in every product. In µ meaning: Requires: Let and be two features, the this case the version required for modules to run will be the Ö Õ ÙÖ × relation means that needs to be opera- maximum of the versions of the child features of ÅÓÙÐ×. tive. For example, feature ÓÒ Ö ××Å Ò ÑÒØ needs It would depend on the type of relation and the type of pa- feature Ê ÔÓ×ØÓÖ Ý to be operative, otherwise it would not rameter how the derived parameters would be made up. It is µ work. Excludes: Let and be two features, the rela- in accordance to the FM designer to define this composition tion ÜÐ Ù× means that it is not possible to have a rules. product with and at the same time. For example, fea- We use an extended notation of the Czarneki’s feature ture Ê ÔÓ×ØÓÖ Ý ÜÐ Ù× È means that it is no possi- models that allows to represent parameters. Using the ble to have a JAMES product with both features at the same JAMES example, every feature may have one or more pa- time. rameters. Thus, it would be possible to decorate the graphi- cal FM with this kind of information. Figure 2 illustrates a 2.2 A Notation for Extended Feature Models piece of the FM of Figure 1 with parameters with our own notation. The most cited proposals [5, 9, 10, 15] just deal with Modules feature as described formerly. However, there are some version: max(Forum.version, voices proposing that, in addition to all those characteris- CongreessManagement.version, tics, it would be very important to include parameters (also Repository.version, Calendar.version) called attributes) in FMs [6, 14]. There are several concepts that we would like to clarify before giving a notation for extended FMs: Calendar Repository version:5 version:4 Forum Congress ¯ Feature: a prominent characteristic of a product. De- Management version:5 pending on the development stage, it may refer to a version: 4 requirement (if products are requirement documents), a component in an architecture (if products are com- Figure 2. Extended FM for JAMES ponent architectures) or even to pieces of code [12] (if In this example, every child feature of the Å ÓÙÐ × fea- products are binary code in a feature oriented program- ture have a parameter: ÚÖ×ÓÒ. This parameter would rep- ming approaches) of a SPL. resent the PHP version that is needed to run the module 2. 1PHP 5 uses object-oriented primitives that are not available in version ¯ Parameter: is any characteristic of a feature that can be 4, but all PHP modules written in version 4 should work using a PHP 5 µ measured. There are two kinds of parameters basic interpreter parameters: parameters that are directly related to the 2these values are just illustrative, they may have nothing to do with real µ feature or derived parameters: parameters that are values 2 JAMES R5 R1 R2 R3 R4 GUI Core Modules Mandatory Feature UserManagement WSInterface Optional Feature R6 R7 R8 Alternative Feature Or Feature DB LDAP PC PDA Calendar Repository Requires Forum Congress Management R9 Excludes R10 Figure 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Design and Implementation of Object-Constraint Programming
    Felgentreff, The Design and Implementation of Object-Constraint Programming The Design and Implementation of Object-Constraint Programming von Tim Felgentreff Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades des Doktor der Naturwissenschaften (Doctor rerum naturalium) vorgelegt der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Universität Potsdam. Betreuer Prof. Dr. Robert Hirschfeld Fachgebiet Software-Architekturen Hasso-Plattner-Institut Universität Potsdam 21. April 2017 Erklärung Hiermit erkläre ich an Eides statt, dass ich die vorliegende Dissertation selbst angefertigt und nur die im Literaturverzeichnis aufgeführten Quellen und Hilfsmittel verwendet habe. Diese Dissertation oder Teile davon wurden nicht als Prüfungsarbeit für eine staatliche oder andere wissenschaftliche Prüfung eingereicht. Ich versichere weiterhin, dass ich diese Arbeit oder eine andere Abhandlung nicht bei einer anderen Fakultät oder einer anderen Universität eingereicht habe. Potsdam, den 21. April 2017 Tim Felgentreff v Abstract Constraints allow developers to specify properties of systems and have those properties be main- tained automatically. This results in compact declarations to describe interactive applications avoid- ing scattered code to check and imperatively re-satisfy invariants in response to user input that perturbs the system. Constraints thus provide flexibility and expressiveness for solving complex problems and maintaining a desired system state. Despite these advantages, constraint program- ming is not yet widespread, with imperative programming still being the norm. There is a long history of research on constraint programming as well as its integration with general purpose programming languages, especially from the imperative paradigm. However, this integration typically does not unify the constructs for encapsulation and abstraction from both paradigms and often leads to a parallel world of constraint code fragments and abstractions inter- mingled with the general purpose code.
    [Show full text]
  • Constraint Programming and Operations Research
    Noname manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Constraint Programming and Operations Research J. N. Hooker and W.-J. van Hoeve November 2017 Abstract We present an overview of the integration of constraint program- ming (CP) and operations research (OR) to solve combinatorial optimization problems. We interpret CP and OR as relying on a common primal-dual solution approach that provides the basis for integration using four main strategies. The first strategy tightly interweaves propagation from CP and relaxation from OR in a single solver. The second applies OR techniques to domain filtering in CP. The third decomposes the problem into a portion solved by CP and a portion solved by OR, using CP-based column generation or logic-based Benders decomposition. The fourth uses relaxed decision diagrams developed for CP propagation to help solve dynamic programming models in OR. The paper cites a significant fraction of the literature on CP/OR integration and concludes with future perspectives. Keywords Constraint Programming, Operations Research, Hybrid Optimization 1 Introduction Constraint programming (CP) and operations research (OR) have the same overall goal. They strive to capture a real-world situation in a mathematical model and solve it efficiently. Both fields use constraints to build the model, often in conjunction with an objective function to evaluate solutions. It is therefore only natural that the two fields join forces to solve problems. J. N. Hooker Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA E-mail: [email protected] W.-J. van Hoeve Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA E-mail: [email protected] 2 J. N.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 GLOBAL CONSTRAINTS and FILTERING ALGORITHMS
    Chapter 1 GLOBAL CONSTRAINTS AND FILTERING ALGORITHMS Jean-Charles R´egin ILOG 1681, route des Dolines, Sophia Antipolis, 06560 Valbonne, France [email protected] Abstract Constraint programming (CP) is mainly based on filtering algorithms; their association with global constraints is one of the main strengths of CP. This chapter is an overview of these two techniques. Some of the most frequently used global constraints are presented. In addition, the filtering algorithms establishing arc consistency for two useful con- straints, the alldiff and the global cardinality constraints, are fully de- tailed. Filtering algorithms are also considered from a theoretical point of view: three different ways to design filtering algorithms are described and the quality of the filtering algorithms studied so far is discussed. A categorization is then proposed. Over-constrained problems are also mentioned and global soft constraints are introduced. Keywords: Global constraint, filtering algorithm, arc consistency, alldiff, global car- dinality constraint, over-constrained problems, global soft constraint, graph theory, matching. 1. Introduction A constraint network (CN) consists of a set of variables; domains of possible values associated with each of these variables; and a set of con- straints that link up the variables and define the set of combinations of values that are allowed. The search for an instantiation of all vari- ables that satisfies all the constraints is called a Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP), and such an instantiation is called a solution of a CSP. A lot of problems can be easily coded in terms of CSP. For instance, CSP has already been used to solve problems of scene analysis, place- 1 2 ment, resource allocation, crew scheduling, time tabling, scheduling, fre- quency allocation, car sequencing, and so on.
    [Show full text]
  • Prolog Lecture 6
    Prolog lecture 6 ● Solving Sudoku puzzles ● Constraint Logic Programming ● Natural Language Processing Playing Sudoku 2 Make the problem easier 3 We can model this problem in Prolog using list permutations Each row must be a permutation of [1,2,3,4] Each column must be a permutation of [1,2,3,4] Each 2x2 box must be a permutation of [1,2,3,4] 4 Represent the board as a list of lists [[A,B,C,D], [E,F,G,H], [I,J,K,L], [M,N,O,P]] 5 The sudoku predicate is built from simultaneous perm constraints sudoku( [[X11,X12,X13,X14],[X21,X22,X23,X24], [X31,X32,X33,X34],[X41,X42,X43,X44]]) :- %rows perm([X11,X12,X13,X14],[1,2,3,4]), perm([X21,X22,X23,X24],[1,2,3,4]), perm([X31,X32,X33,X34],[1,2,3,4]), perm([X41,X42,X43,X44],[1,2,3,4]), %cols perm([X11,X21,X31,X41],[1,2,3,4]), perm([X12,X22,X32,X42],[1,2,3,4]), perm([X13,X23,X33,X43],[1,2,3,4]), perm([X14,X24,X34,X44],[1,2,3,4]), %boxes perm([X11,X12,X21,X22],[1,2,3,4]), perm([X13,X14,X23,X24],[1,2,3,4]), perm([X31,X32,X41,X42],[1,2,3,4]), perm([X33,X34,X43,X44],[1,2,3,4]). 6 Scale up in the obvious way to 3x3 7 Brute-force is impractically slow There are very many valid grids: 6670903752021072936960 ≈ 6.671 × 1021 Our current approach does not encode the interrelationships between the constraints For more information on Sudoku enumeration: http://www.afjarvis.staff.shef.ac.uk/sudoku/ 8 Prolog programs can be viewed as constraint satisfaction problems Prolog is limited to the single equality constraint: – two terms must unify We can generalise this to include other types of constraint Doing so leads
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum-Accelerated Constraint Programming
    Quantum-accelerated constraint programming Kyle E. C. Booth1,2, Bryan O’Gorman1,3, Jeffrey Marshall1,2, Stuart Hadfield1,2, and Eleanor Rieffel1 1Quantum Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (QuAIL), NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA 2USRA Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science (RIACS), Mountain View, CA 94043, USA 3Berkeley Quantum Information and Computation Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Constraint programming (CP) is a paradigm used to model and solve con- straint satisfaction and combinatorial optimization problems. In CP, problems are modeled with constraints that describe acceptable solutions and solved with backtracking tree search augmented with logical inference. In this paper, we show how quantum algorithms can accelerate CP, at both the levels of in- ference and search. Leveraging existing quantum algorithms, we introduce a quantum-accelerated filtering algorithm for the alldifferent global constraint and discuss its applicability to a broader family of global constraints with sim- ilar structure. We propose frameworks for the integration of quantum filtering algorithms within both classical and quantum backtracking search schemes, including a novel hybrid classical-quantum backtracking search method. This work suggests that CP is a promising candidate application for early fault- tolerant quantum computers and beyond. 1 Introduction Constraint programming (CP) is a paradigm used to model and solve constraint satisfaction and combinatorial optimization problems [1]. In CP, a problem is expressed in terms of a declarative model, identifying variables and constraints, and the model is evaluated using a general-purpose constraint solver, leveraging techniques from a variety of fields including artificial intelligence, computer science, and operations research. CP has successfully been used to approach challenging problems in areas such as scheduling, planning, and vehicle routing [1–3].
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook of Constraint Programming
    Handbook of Constraint Programming Francesca Rossi, Peter van Beek, Toby Walsh Elsevier Contents Contents v I First part 1 1 Modelling 3 Barbara M. Smith 1.1 Preliminaries ................................ 4 1.2 Representing a Problem . ......................... 5 1.3 Propagation and Search . ......................... 5 1.4 Viewpoints . ................................ 7 1.5 Expressing the Constraints ......................... 8 1.6 Auxiliary Variables . ......................... 12 1.7 Implied constraints . ......................... 13 1.8 Reformulations of CSPs . ......................... 17 1.9 Combining Viewpoints . ......................... 20 1.10 Symmetry and Modelling . ......................... 24 1.11 Optimization Problems . ......................... 26 1.12 Supporting modelling & reformulation . ................. 28 Bibliography 31 Appendices 35 v Part I First part Handbook of Constraint Programming 3 Francesca Rossi, Peter van Beek, Toby Walsh c 2006 Elsevier All rights reserved Chapter 1 Modelling Barbara M. Smith Constraint programming can be a successful technology for solving practical problems; however, there is abundant evidence that how the problem to be solved is modelled as a Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) can have a dramatic effect on how easy it is to find a solution, or indeed whether it can realistically be solved at all. The importance of modelling in constraint programming has long been recognized e.g. in invited talks by Freuder [14] and Puget [34]. In this chapter, it will be assumed that the problem to be solved can be represented as a CSP whose domains are finite; infinite domains are discussed in Chapter 16, “Continuous and Interval Constraints”. In most of the examples, the variable domains will be sets of integers; see Chapter 17, “Constraints over Structured Domains”, for more on set variables and other variable types.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Systematic Backtracking for Mixed Integer Programs
    From: AAAI Technical Report WS-02-14. Compilation copyright © 2002, AAAI (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved. Non-Systematic Backtracking for Mixed Integer Programs Steven Prestwich Armagan Tarim Cork Constraint Computation Centre Artificial Intelligence Group University College, Cork, Ireland Department of Computer Science [email protected] University of York,York, U.K. [email protected] Abstract The aim is to solve large MIPs that combine hard optimisa- tion with few feasible solutions. The remainder of this sec- Avariety of hybrids of Constraint Programming, Arti- tion provides background material. ficial Intelligence and Operations Research techniques have given impressive results. Three recent approaches are (i) the use of relaxations in constraint systems, (ii) Propagation and relaxation non-systematic backtracking to boost the scalability of Constraint programming systems use constraint propagation constraint solvers, and (iii) non-systematic backtrack- to eliminate infeasible variable assignments, and is the tool ing to boost the scalability of branch-and-bound search. of choice for combinatorial problems in which feasible so- This paper describes a hybrid of all three approaches lutions are hard to find. Operations Research, on the other that combines non-systematic backtracking, SAT-based hand, uses more sophisticated cost reasoning to prune search inference and linear relaxation. It is intended for large MIPs that are hard for reasons of both optimisation and spaces, and to locate high-quality solutions. The two disci- feasibility. Such problems are of practical as well as plines have complementary strengths and weaknesses, and theoretical interest and we expect the hybrid to find their combination can yield results that are superior to either many applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Flexible Goal-Oriented Logic Programming
    FACULTY OF SCIENCES Towards Flexible Goal-Oriented Logic Programming ir. Benoit Desouter Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Computer Science Supervisors: prof. dr. ir. Tom Schrijvers prof. dr. ir. Marko van Dooren Department of Applied Mathematics, Computer Science and Statistics Faculty of Sciences, Ghent University ii Acknowledgments As it feels more natural to thank people in the language that we have used on a daily basis during the journey towards completing this PhD thesis, I'll use Dutch for most of the next few pages. In de eerste plaats wil ik mijn promotoren Tom en Marko bedanken. Tom, bedankt voor het geduld als ik occasioneel iets maar half begreep, en om er altijd vertrouwen in te blijven hebben. Je hebt me heel wat kansen aangereikt, waardoor ik van heel wat onderwerpen iets heb opgestoken. Marko, hoewel je er pas halverwege bijkwam, toonde je al snel interesse voor het onderwerp en heb je er vanuit je eigen expertise heel wat aan toegevoegd. Je deur stond altijd voor me open als ik even een tussentijdse statusupdate wou geven. Bedankt voor de babbels over vanalles en nog wat, en om me grondig te betrekken bij het geven van Programmeren 1. Ik heb nog heel wat bijgeleerd over objec- tori¨entatie door jouw visie, slides en codevoorbeelden. Daarnaast ook bedankt om mijn lokale LATEX-goeroe te zijn: niettegenstaande ik LATEX al tien jaar lang gebruik, heb ik voor het precies goed krijgen van deze thesis heel wat nieuwe pakketten en trucjes moeten gebruiken, met regelmatig vreemde out- put of cryptische foutmeldingen tot gevolg die ik niet altijd alleen kon oplossen | of het zou me op zijn minst veel meer tijd gekost hebben.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of the Monadic Constraint Programming Framework
    Overview of the Monadic Constraint Programming Framework Tom Schrijvers Dept. of Computer Science, K.U.Leuven Celestijnenlaan 200A 3001 Heverlee, Belgium [email protected] Abstract. A constraint programming system combines two essential components: a constraint solver and a search engine. The constraint solver reasons about satisfiability of conjunctions of constraints, and the search engine controls the search for solutions by iteratively exploring a disjunctive search tree defined by the constraint program. The Monadic Constraint Programming framework gives a monadic defi- nition of constraint programming where the solver is defined as a monad threaded through the monadic search tree. Search and search strategies can then be defined as firstclass objects that can themselves be built or extended by composable search transformers. Search transformers give a powerful and unifying approach to viewing search in constraint program- ming, and the resulting constraint programming system is first class and extremely flexible. 1 Introduction A constraint programming (CP) [11] system combines two essential components: a constraint solver and a search engine. The constraint solver reasons about conjunctions of constraints and its principal job it to determine unsatisfiability of a conjunction. The search engine controls the search for solutions by iteratively exploring an OR search tree defined by the program. Whenever the conjunction of constraints in one path defined by the search tree is unsatisfiable, search changes to explore another part of the search tree. Constraint programming is a declarative programming formalism, where the constraints are defined declaratively, but the underlying constraint solvers are highly stateful, and indeed to specify complex search CP programs rely on reflect- ing state information from the solver.
    [Show full text]
  • Constraint Programming
    Constraint programming Alexander Bockmayr John N. Hooker May 2003 Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 ConstraintsasProcedures . ... 2 1.2 ParallelswithBranchandCut . .. 3 1.3 ConstraintSatisfaction. .... 4 1.4 HybridMethods ................................. 6 1.5 PerformanceIssues ............................... 7 2 Constraints 8 2.1 WhatisaConstraint? .............................. 8 2.2 Arithmeticversus SymbolicConstraints . ....... 9 2.3 GlobalConstraints ............................... 9 2.4 LocalConsistency ................................ 10 2.5 ConstraintPropagation . .. 11 2.6 Filtering Algorithms for Global Constraints . ......... 12 2.7 Modeling in Constraint Programming : An Illustrating Example ...... 14 3 Search 17 3.1 VariableandValueOrdering . .. 17 3.2 CompleteSearch ................................. 18 3.3 HeuristicSearch ................................. 19 4 Hybrid Methods 19 4.1 Branch,InferandRelax . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... .. 20 4.2 BendersDecomposition . .. ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... .. 22 4.3 MachineSchedulingExample . .. 23 4.4 Continuous Relaxations for Global Constraints . ......... 25 4.5 OtherApplications............................... 26 5 Constraint Programming Languages and Systems 26 5.1 High-levelModelingLanguages . .... 27 5.2 ConstraintProgrammingSystems. .... 27 1 Introduction A discrete optimization problem can be given a declarative or procedural formulation, and both have their advantages. A declarative formulation simply states the constraints and objective function. It allows one to describe
    [Show full text]
  • The Constraint Programming Solver This Document Is an Individual Chapter from SAS/OR® 15.1 User’S Guide: Mathematical Programming
    SAS/OR® 15.1 User’s Guide Mathematical Programming The Constraint Programming Solver This document is an individual chapter from SAS/OR® 15.1 User’s Guide: Mathematical Programming. The correct bibliographic citation for this manual is as follows: SAS Institute Inc. 2018. SAS/OR® 15.1 User’s Guide: Mathematical Programming. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc. SAS/OR® 15.1 User’s Guide: Mathematical Programming Copyright © 2018, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA All Rights Reserved. Produced in the United States of America. For a hard-copy book: No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher, SAS Institute Inc. For a web download or e-book: Your use of this publication shall be governed by the terms established by the vendor at the time you acquire this publication. The scanning, uploading, and distribution of this book via the Internet or any other means without the permission of the publisher is illegal and punishable by law. Please purchase only authorized electronic editions and do not participate in or encourage electronic piracy of copyrighted materials. Your support of others’ rights is appreciated. U.S. Government License Rights; Restricted Rights: The Software and its documentation is commercial computer software developed at private expense and is provided with RESTRICTED RIGHTS to the United States Government. Use, duplication, or disclosure of the Software by the United States Government is subject to the license terms of this Agreement pursuant to, as applicable, FAR 12.212, DFAR 227.7202-1(a), DFAR 227.7202-3(a), and DFAR 227.7202-4, and, to the extent required under U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Constraint Programming and Scheduling Materials from the Course Taught at HTWG Constanz, Germany
    Constraint Programming and Scheduling Materials from the course taught at HTWG Constanz, Germany Hana Rudová Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University Brno, Czech Republic http://www.fi.muni.cz/~hanka May 2009 Hana Rudová (FI MU, CR) Constraint Programming and Scheduling May 2009 1 / 132 Constraint Programming and Scheduling: Outline Constraint Programming Introduction Modeling Propagation Search Constraint-based Scheduling Introduction Modeling Propagation Search Hana Rudová (FI MU, CR) Constraint Programming and Scheduling May 2009 2 / 132 Constraint Programming: Introduction 1 CSP 2 CP Approach 3 Complexity Hana Rudová (FI MU, CR) Constraint Programming and Scheduling May 2009 3 / 132 Materials on Constraint Programming Rina Dechter: Constraint processing. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2003. http://www.ics.uci.edu/~dechter/books/ Francesca Rossi, Peter Van Beek, Toby Walsh (editors): Handbook of Constraint Programming, Elsevier, 2006 Edward Tsang: Foundations of Constraint Satisfaction. Academic Press, 1993. full text available: http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/Research/CSP/edward/FCS.html Roman Barták: On-line guide to constraint programming. http://ktilinux.ms.mff.cuni.cz/~bartak/constraints/ Constraint Programming Online http://slash.math.unipd.it/cp/index.php Hana Rudová (FI MU, CR) Constraint Programming and Scheduling May 2009 4 / 132 Constraint Given set of domain variables Y = fy1;:::; yk g finite set of values (domain) D = D1 [ ::: [ Dk constraint c defined on Y is a subset of D1 × ::: × Dk i.e. relation it constrains values which can
    [Show full text]