Hi Tias,

it's slightly complicated (and it has changed in Gecode 4).  The default search 
is implemented in gecode/flatzinc/flatzinc.cpp in function createBranchers, and 
the defaults in 4.0.0 are

    branch(*this, iv_sol, INT_VAR_AFC_SIZE_MAX(0.99), INT_VAL_MIN());
    branch(*this, bv_sol, INT_VAR_AFC_MAX(0.99), INT_VAL_MIN());
    branch(*this, fv_sol, FLOAT_VAR_SIZE_MIN(), FLOAT_VAL_SPLIT_MIN());
    branch(*this, sv_sol, SET_VAR_AFC_SIZE_MAX(0.99), SET_VAL_MIN_INC());

where iv_sol are the variables mentioned in the output statement and not 
mentioned in an explicit search annotation, and

      branch(fzs,fzs.iv_aux,INT_VAR_AFC_SIZE_MAX(),INT_VAL_MIN());
      branch(fzs,fzs.bv_aux,INT_VAR_AFC_MAX(),INT_VAL_MIN());
      branch(fzs,fzs.sv_aux,SET_VAR_AFC_SIZE_MAX(),SET_VAL_MIN_INC());
      branch(fzs,fzs.fv_aux,FLOAT_VAR_AFC_SIZE_MAX(),FLOAT_VAL_SPLIT_MIN());

where iv_aux are variables introduced by mzn2fzn that are not functionally 
defined.

I'm planning to introduce annotations default_{int,bool,set,float}_search that 
you can stick on the solve item to change the default for the different 
variable types - would that be useful?

Cheers,
Guido

On 16/04/2013, at 2:22 AM, Tias Guns <tias.g...@cs.kuleuven.be> wrote:

> Hi Guido,
> 
> What is the default search strategy of gecode's fz interpreter?
> 
> Its default search works really well on one group of variables, but less on 
> the other. I want to change it for the other, but whatever I do the search is 
> a lot slower (because of worse choices on the variables I do not wish to 
> change the order on)...
> 
> I couldn't find it on http://www.gecode.org/flatzinc.html or MPG.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Tias
> 
> Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gecode users mailing list
> users@gecode.org
> https://www.gecode.org/mailman/listinfo/gecode-users


_______________________________________________
Gecode users mailing list
users@gecode.org
https://www.gecode.org/mailman/listinfo/gecode-users

Reply via email to