Setting the Research Agenda in Automated Timetabling: The Second International Timetabling Competition

  • Authors:

  • Barry McCollum;Andrea Schaerf;Ben Paechter;Paul McMullan;Rhyd Lewis;Andrew J. Parkes;Luca Di Gaspero;Rong Qu;Edmund K. Burke

  • Affiliations:

  • School of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Queen's University, Belfast BT7 1NN, United Kingdom;Department of Electrical, Management and Mechanical Engineering, University of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy;Centre for Emergent Computing, Napier University, Edinburgh EH10 5DT, United Kingdom;School of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Queen's University, Belfast BT7 1NN, United Kingdom;Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3EU, United Kingdom;School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham NG8 1BB, United Kingdom;Department of Electrical, Management and Mechanical Engineering, University of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy;School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham NG8 1BB, United Kingdom;School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham NG8 1BB, United Kingdom

  • Venue:
  • INFORMS Journal on Computing
  • Year:
  • 2010

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

The Second International Timetabling Competition (TTC2007) opened in August 2007. Building on the success of the first competition in 2002, this sequel aimed to further develop research activity in the area of educational timetabling. The broad aim of the competition was to create better understanding between researchers and practitioners by allowing emerging techniques to be developed and tested on real-world models of timetabling problems. To support this, a primary goal was to provide researchers with models of problems faced by practitioners through incorporating a significant number of real-world constraints. Another objective of the competition was to stimulate debate within the widening timetabling research community. The competition was divided into three tracks to reflect the important variations that exist in educational timetabling within higher education. Because these formulations incorporate an increased number of “real-world” issues, it is anticipated that the competition will now set the research agenda within the field. After finishing in January 2008, final results were made available in May 2008. Along with background to the competition, the competition tracks are described here along with a brief overview of the techniques used by the competition winners.