Hi Marc, My turn... :) On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 01:52:37PM +0100, Marc van Dongen wrote: > Hi there, > > > Currently, I am working on an optimisation problem > which can be expressed as follows: > > minimize( labeling( LIST ), EXPR ). > > However, the problem that I am solving has the > nice property that if a solution has been found for > cost = COST, and if no solutions exist (for fixed N) > for cost in { COST - 1, COST - 2, ..., COST - N } > then the solution for cost = COST is optimal. What is it about minimize's behaviour that you would like to change, in order to try to exploit this? Note that if a solution has been found with cost COST, then minimize proceeds to search for a solution with *any* cost less than COST. If it proceeded to try cost = COST-1, etc., then yes, one could stop when COST-N had no solution, but that's not the way it works (because in general that's not a particularly smart way to do it). Is there some way of determining that COST-1 through COST-N have no solution that would be significantly cheaper than just looking for anything less than COST-1? Cheers, WarwickReceived on Fri Aug 02 16:21:13 2002
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed 16 Nov 2005 06:07:16 PM GMT GMT