Global optimization methods for engineering design

The problem is to find a global minimum for the Problem P. Necessary and sufficient conditions are available for local optimality. However, global solution can be assured only under the assumption of convexity of the problem. If the constraint set S is compact and the cost function is continuous on it, existence of a global minimum is guaranteed. However, in view of the fact that no global optimality conditions are available, a global solution can be found only by an exhaustive search to satisfy Inequality. The exhaustive search can be organized in such a way that the entire design space need not be searched for the solution. This way the computational burden is reduced somewhat. It is concluded that zooming algorithm for global optimizations appears to be a good alternative to stochastic methods. More testing is needed; a general, robust, and efficient local minimizer is required. IDESIGN was used in all numerical calculations which is based on a sequential quadratic programming algorithm, and since feasible set keeps on shrinking, a good algorithm to find an initial feasible point is required. Such algorithms need to be developed and evaluated

Towards declarative diagnosis of constraint programs over finite domains

The paper proposes a theoretical approach of the debugging of constraint programs based on a notion of explanation tree. The proposed approach is an attempt to adapt algorithmic debugging to constraint programming. In this theoretical framework for domain reduction, explanations are proof trees explaining value removals. These proof trees are defined by inductive definitions which express the removals of values as consequences of other value removals. Explanations may be considered as the essence of constraint programming. They are a declarative view of the computation trace. The diagnosis consists in locating an error in an explanation rooted by a symptom.Comment: In M. Ronsse, K. De Bosschere (eds), proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Automated Debugging (AADEBUG 2003), September 2003, Ghent. cs.SE/030902

Constraint Programming viewed as Rule-based Programming

We study here a natural situation when constraint programming can be entirely reduced to rule-based programming. To this end we explain first how one can compute on constraint satisfaction problems using rules represented by simple first-order formulas. Then we consider constraint satisfaction problems that are based on predefined, explicitly given constraints. To solve them we first derive rules from these explicitly given constraints and limit the computation process to a repeated application of these rules, combined with labeling.We consider here two types of rules. The first type, that we call equality rules, leads to a new notion of local consistency, called {\em rule consistency} that turns out to be weaker than arc consistency for constraints of arbitrary arity (called hyper-arc consistency in \cite{MS98b}). For Boolean constraints rule consistency coincides with the closure under the well-known propagation rules for Boolean constraints. The second type of rules, that we call membership rules, yields a rule-based characterization of arc consistency. To show feasibility of this rule-based approach to constraint programming we show how both types of rules can be automatically generated, as {\tt CHR} rules of \cite{fruhwirth-constraint-95}. This yields an implementation of this approach to programming by means of constraint logic programming. We illustrate the usefulness of this approach to constraint programming by discussing various examples, including Boolean constraints, two typical examples of many valued logics, constraints dealing with Waltz's language for describing polyhedral scenes, and Allen's qualitative approach to temporal logic.Comment: 39 pages. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming Journa

Finite domain constraint programming systems

Tutorial at CP'2002, Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming. Powerpoint slides.</p

Logic programming in the context of multiparadigm programming: the Oz experience

Oz is a multiparadigm language that supports logic programming as one of its major paradigms. A multiparadigm language is designed to support different programming paradigms (logic, functional, constraint, object-oriented, sequential, concurrent, etc.) with equal ease. This article has two goals: to give a tutorial of logic programming in Oz and to show how logic programming fits naturally into the wider context of multiparadigm programming. Our experience shows that there are two classes of problems, which we call algorithmic and search problems, for which logic programming can help formulate practical solutions. Algorithmic problems have known efficient algorithms. Search problems do not have known efficient algorithms but can be solved with search. The Oz support for logic programming targets these two problem classes specifically, using the concepts needed for each. This is in contrast to the Prolog approach, which targets both classes with one set of concepts, which results in less than optimal support for each class. To explain the essential difference between algorithmic and search programs, we define the Oz execution model. This model subsumes both concurrent logic programming (committed-choice-style) and search-based logic programming (Prolog-style). Instead of Horn clause syntax, Oz has a simple, fully compositional, higher-order syntax that accommodates the abilities of the language. We conclude with lessons learned from this work, a brief history of Oz, and many entry points into the Oz literature.Comment: 48 pages, to appear in the journal "Theory and Practice of Logic Programming