Advertisement

Automated Solution of a Highly Constrained School Timetabling Problem - Preliminary Results

  • Marc Bufé
  • Tim Fischer
  • Holger Gubbels
  • Claudius Häcker
  • Oliver Hasprich
  • Christian Scheibel
  • Karsten Weicker
  • Nicole Weicker
  • Michael Wenig
  • Christian Wolfangel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2037)

Abstract

This work introduces a highly constrained school timetabling problem which was modeled from the requirements of a German high school. The concept for solving the problem uses a hybrid approach. On the one hand an evolutionary algorithm searches the space of all permutations of the events from which a timetable builder generates the school timetables. Those timetables are further optimized by local search using specific mutation operators. Thus, only valid (partial) timetables are generated which fulfill all hard constraints.

Keywords

Time Slot Tabu Search Mutation Operator Constraint Violation Soft Constraint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Andrea Schaerf. A survey of automated timetabling. Artificial Intelligence Review, 13(2):87–127, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Even, A. Itai, and A. Shamir. On the complexity of timetabling and multicommodity flow problems. SIAM Journal of Computation, 5(4):691–703, 1976.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alberto Colorni, Marco Dorigo, and Vittorio Maniezzo. Metaheuristics for high-school timetabling. Computational Optimization and Applications, 9(3):277–298, 1998.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carlos Fernandes, João Paulo Caldeira, Fernando Melicio, and Agostinho Rosa. High school weekly timetabling by evolutionary algorithms. In ACM SAC 99, pages 344–350, New York, 1999. ACM.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Werner Junginger. Timetabling in germany-a survey. Interfaces, 16(4):66–74, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Emma Hart and David Corne. The state of the art in evolutionary approaches to timetabling and scheduling. EvoStim-The EVONET Working Group on Evolutionary Scheduling and timetabling, 1998.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alberto Colorni, Marco Dorigo, and Vittorio Maniezzo. Genetic algorithms: A new approach to the time-table problem. In M. Akgül, editor, Combinatorial Optimization, pages 235–239. Springer, Berlin, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Andrea Schaerf. Tabu search techniques for large high-school timetabling problems. Technical Report CS-R9611, CWI, Amsterdam, NL, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ben Paechter, R.C. Rankin, Andrew Cumming, and Terence C. Fogarty. Timetabling the classes of an entire university with an evolutionary algorithm. In Agoston E. Eiben, Thomas Bäck, Marc Schoenauer, and Hans-Paul Schwefel, editors, Parallel Problem Solving from Nature-PPSN V, pages 865–874, Berlin, 1998. Springer. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marc Bufé
    • 1
  • Tim Fischer
    • 1
  • Holger Gubbels
    • 1
  • Claudius Häcker
    • 1
  • Oliver Hasprich
  • Christian Scheibel
    • 1
  • Karsten Weicker
    • 1
  • Nicole Weicker
    • 1
  • Michael Wenig
    • 1
  • Christian Wolfangel
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Computer ScienceUniversity of StuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations