EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Gilles Simonin
dblp:45/8725
· DBLP profile ↗
15ranked-venue papers
3as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-3407-1806ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 13 · 2 first-author · 3 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 8 · 1 first-author · 3 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 first-authorTheory of computation · 2Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 first-author
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Theoretical computer science
4 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 38% Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 37% Graph algorithms and graph theory · 25% | |
| Artificial intelligence
3 papers |
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 100% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Environmental and earth informatics · 100% |
Topics — the 12 heaviest of 14, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
constraint programming |
1.3 | 2 | 2025 | Towards the 30 by 30 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework Target: Optimising Graph Connectivity in Constraint-Based Spatial Planning · IJCAI 2025 Using Approximation within Constraint Programming to Solve the Parallel Machine Scheduling Problem with Additional Unit Resources · AAAI 2020 |
Mathematical optimization › optimization under uncertainty
robust optimization |
1.0 | 2 | 2024 | Polynomial Time Presolve Algorithms for Rotation-Based Models Solving the Robust Stable Matching Problem · IJCAI 2024 Robust Stable Marriage · AAAI 2017 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › global constraints
alldifferent constraint |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Bimodal Depth-First Search for Scalable GAC for AllDifferent · IJCAI 2025 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
arc consistency |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Bimodal Depth-First Search for Scalable GAC for AllDifferent · IJCAI 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › matching
stable matching |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Polynomial Time Presolve Algorithms for Rotation-Based Models Solving the Robust Stable Matching Problem · IJCAI 2024 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph matching › matching algorithms
stable marriage |
0.6 | 2 | 2017 | Finding Robust Solutions to Stable Marriage · IJCAI 2017 Robust Stable Marriage · AAAI 2017 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph matching
matching algorithms |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Robust Stable Marriage · AAAI 2017 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
matching |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | A CP-Based Approach for Popular Matching · AAAI 2016 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › matching › matching under preferences
popular matching |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | A CP-Based Approach for Popular Matching · AAAI 2016 |
Mathematical optimization
constraint programming |
0.2 | 2 | 2017 | Finding Robust Solutions to Stable Marriage · IJCAI 2017 A CP-Based Approach for Popular Matching · AAAI 2016 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
scheduling |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Using Approximation within Constraint Programming to Solve the Parallel Machine Scheduling Problem with Additional Unit Resources · AAAI 2020 |
Mathematical optimization › combinatorial optimization
local search |
0.1 | 1 | 2017 | Finding Robust Solutions to Stable Marriage · IJCAI 2017 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
hanan grids · 1.7preprocessing · 0.9pre-processing · 0.9depth-first search · 0.9GPU acceleration · 0.9presolve algorithms · 0.8constraint programming · 0.5approximation · 0.4stability · 0.3robustness · 0.3local search · 0.3genetic algorithm · 0.3(a,b)-supermatch · 0.3global cardinality constraint · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Bimodal Depth-First Search for Scalable GAC for AllDifferentabstractWe propose a version of DFS designed for Constraint Programming, called bimodal DFS, that scales to both sparse and dense graphs. It runs in O(n + ~m) time, where ~m is the sum, for each vertex v, of the minimum between the numbers of successors and non-successors of v. Integrating it into Régin’s GAC algorithm for the AllDifferent constraint results in faster performance as the problem size increases, outperforming a GPU-accelerated version. In the vast majority of our tests, GAC now performs similarly to BC in terms of speed, but is able to solve more problems. Sulian Le Bozec-Chiffoleau, Nicolas Beldiceanu, Charles Prud'homme, Gilles Simonin, Xavier Lorca |
IJCAI | 4 |
| 2025 | Towards the 30 by 30 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework Target: Optimising Graph Connectivity in Constraint-Based Spatial PlanningabstractThe Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework aims to protect 30% of terrestrial, inland water, marine, and coastal ecosystems worldwide, and ensuring that at least 30% of these areas are under effective restoration by 2030. Maintaining and restoring ecological connectivity between natural habitats and protected areas is a key feature of this target. Achieving it will require effective and inclusive spatial planning supported by appropriate decision-support tools. Most spatial planning models address budget as an objective and connectivity as a constraint, formulating problems with Steiner trees. In many real-world cases, such as landscape-scale restoration planning, this formulation is inappropriate when environmental managers seek to optimise connectivity under a budget constraint. This problem was previously addressed with Constraint Programming (CP) and graph variables, but the current approach is severely limited in terms of spatial resolution. In this article, we formalise this problem as the budget-constrained graph connectivity optimisation problem. Based on a real case study: the restoration of forest connectivity in New Caledonia, we illustrate why ``naive'' CP approaches are inefficient. In response, we provide a preprocessing method based on Hanan grids which preserves the existence of at least one optimal solution. Finally, we assess the efficiency of our approach in the New Caledonian case study. Sulian Le Bozec-Chiffoleau, Dimitri Justeau-Allaire, Xavier Lorca, Charles Prud'homme, Gilles Simonin, Philippe Vismara, Philippe Birnbaum, Nicolas Rinck, Nicolas Beldiceanu |
IJCAI | 5 |
| 2024 | Polynomial Time Presolve Algorithms for Rotation-Based Models Solving the Robust Stable Matching Problem
Sulian Le Bozec-Chiffoleau, Charles Prud'homme, Gilles Simonin |
IJCAI | 3 |
| 2020 | Using Approximation within Constraint Programming to Solve the Parallel Machine Scheduling Problem with Additional Unit Resources
Arthur Godet, Xavier Lorca, Emmanuel Hebrard, Gilles Simonin |
AAAI | 4 |
| 2019 | An Approach to Robustness in the Stable Roommates Problem and Its Comparison with the Stable Marriage Problem
Begum Genc, Mohamed Siala 0002, Gilles Simonin, Barry O'Sullivan |
CPAIOR | 3 |
| 2019 | Complexity Study for the Robust Stable Marriage Problem
Begum Genc, Mohamed Siala 0002, Gilles Simonin, Barry O'Sullivan |
Theor. Comput. Sci. | 3 |
| 2017 | Robust Stable MarriageabstractStable Marriage (SM) is a well-known matching problem, where the aim is to match a set of men and women. The resulting matching must satisfy two properties: there is no unassigned person and there are no other assignments where two people of opposite gender prefer each other to their current assignments. We propose a new version of SM called as Robust Stable Marriage (RSM) by combining stability and robustness. We define robustness by introducing (a,b)-supermatches, which has been inspired by (a,b)-supermodels. An (a,b)-supermatch is a stable matching, where if at most a pairs want to break up, it is possible to find another stable matching by breaking at most b other pairs. Begum Genc, Mohamed Siala 0002, Barry O'Sullivan, Gilles Simonin |
AAAI | 4 |
| 2017 | On the Complexity of Robust Stable Marriage
Begum Genc, Mohamed Siala 0002, Gilles Simonin, Barry O'Sullivan |
COCOA (2) | 3 |
| 2017 | New Models for Two Variants of Popular MatchingabstractWe study the problem of matching a set of applicants to a set of posts, where each applicant has an ordinal preference list, which may contain ties, ranking a subset of posts. A matching M is popular if there exists no matching M' where more applicants prefer M' to M . Several notions of optimality are studied in the literature for the case of strictly ordered preference lists. In this paper we address the case involving ties and propose novel algorithmic and complexity results for this variant. Next, we focus on the NP-hard case where additional copies of posts can be added in the preference lists, called Popular Matching with Copies. We define new dominance rules for this problem and present several novel graph properties characterising the posts that should be copied with priority. We present a comprehensive set of experiments for the popular matching problem with copies to evaluate our dominance rules as well as the different branching strategies. Our experimental study emphasizes the importance of the dominance rules and characterises the key aspects of a good branching strategy. Danuta Sorina Chisca, Mohamed Siala 0002, Gilles Simonin, Barry O'Sullivan |
ICTAI | 3 |
| 2017 | Finding Robust Solutions to Stable MarriageabstractWe study the notion of robustness in stable matching problems. We first define robustness by introducing (a,b)-supermatches. An (a,b)-supermatch is a stable matching in which if a pairs break up it is possible to find another stable matching by changing the partners of those a pairs and at most b other pairs. In this context, we define the most robust stable matching as a (1,b)-supermatch where b is minimum. We show that checking whether a given stable matching is a (1,b)-supermatch can be done in polynomial time. Next, we use this procedure to design a constraint programming model, a local search approach, and a genetic algorithm to find the most robust stable matching. Our empirical evaluation on large instances show that local search outperforms the other approaches. Begum Genc, Mohamed Siala 0002, Barry O'Sullivan, Gilles Simonin |
IJCAI | 4 |
| 2016 | A CP-Based Approach for Popular MatchingabstractWe propose a constraint programming approach to the popular matching problem. We show that one can use the Global Cardinality Constraint to encode the problem even in cases that involve ties in the ordinal preferences of the applicants. Danuta Sorina Chisca, Mohamed Siala 0002, Gilles Simonin, Barry O'Sullivan |
AAAI | 3 |
| 2014 | Approximation algorithm for constrained coupled-tasks scheduling problemabstractWe tackle the makespan minimization coupled-tasks problem in presence of compatibility constraints. In particular, we focus on stretched coupled-tasks, i.e. coupled-tasks having the same sub-tasks execution time and idle time duration. In such context, we propose some complexity results according to several parameters and we design an efficient polynomial-time approximation algorithm. Gilles Simonin, Benoît Darties, Jean-Claude König, Rodolphe Giroudeau |
CoDIT | 1 |
| 2014 | Optimisation for the Ride-Sharing Problem: a Complexity-based ApproachabstractThe dial-a-ride problem is a classic challenge in transportation and continues to be relevant across a large spectrum of applications, e.g. door-to-door transportation services, patient transportation, etc. Recently a new variant of the dial-a-ride problem, called ride-sharing, has received attention due to emergence of the use of smartphone-based applications that support location-aware transportation services. The general dial-a-ride problem involves complex constraints on a time-dependent network. In ride-sharing riders (resp. drivers) specify transportation requests (resp. offers) between journey origins and destinations. The two sets of participants, namely riders and drivers, have different constraints; the riders have time windows for starting and finishing the journey, while drivers have a starting time window, a destination, and a vehicle capacity. The challenge is to maximise the overall utility of the participants in the system which can be defined in a variety of ways. In this paper we study variations of the ride-sharing problem, under different notions of utility, from a computational complexity perspective, and identify a number of tractable and intractable cases. These results provide a basis for the development of efficient methods and heuristics for solving problems of real-world scale. Gilles Simonin, Barry O'Sullivan |
ECAI | 1 |
| 2014 | Coupled-Tasks in Presence of Bipartite Compatibilities Graphs
Benoît Darties, Gilles Simonin, Rodolphe Giroudeau, Jean-Claude König |
ISCO | 2 |
| 2012 | Scheduling Scientific Experiments on the Rosetta/Philae Mission
Gilles Simonin, Christian Artigues, Emmanuel Hebrard, Pierre Lopez 0001 |
CP | 1 |