Research Article
A Constraint Programming Method for Advanced Planning and Scheduling System with Multilevel Structured Products
Table 3
Comparison of CP and MIP models.
| | Instance | CP | IP | | No. of variables | No. of constraints | CPU time (s) | Objective | No. of variables | No. of constraints | CPU time (s) | Objective |
| | a-1 | 182 | 539 | 0.1 | 50 | 182 | 301 | 0.2 | 50 | | a-2 | 0.1 | 75 | 0.2 | 75 | | a-3 | 0.1 | 150 | 0.1 | 150 |
| | b-1 | 337 | 1964 | 0.5 | 50 | 657 | 1190 | 37.4 | 50 | | b-2 | 1000+ | 75 | 1000+ | 75 | | b-3 | 3.6 | 125 | 1000+ | 175 |
| | c-1 | 407 | 13937 | 16.5 | 75 | 4693 | 9188 | 44.4 | 75 | | c-2 | 5.7 | 125 | 1000+ | 125 | | c-3 | 1000+ | 300 | 1000+ | 275 |
|
|
The instance results in bold are proved to be optimal.
|
