Dynamic Heuristics for Backtrack Search on Tree-Decomposition of CSPs

This paper deals with methods exploiting tree-decomposition approaches for solving constraint networks. We consider here the practical efficiency of these approaches by defining five classes of variable orders more and more dynamic which preserve the time complexity bound. For that, we define extensions of this theoretical time complexity bound to increase the dynamic aspect of these orders. We define a constant k allowing us to extend the classical bound from O(exp(w + 1)) firstly to O(exp(w + k + 1)), and finally to O(exp(2(w + k+1)−s −)), with w the ”tree-width ” of a CSP and s − the minimum size of its separators. Finally, we assess the defined theoretical extension of the time complexity bound from a practical viewpoint

Experimental evaluation of preprocessing algorithms for constraint satisfaction problems

This paper presents an experimental evaluation of two orthogonal schemes for preprocessing constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs). The first of these schemes involves a class of local consistency techniques that includes directional arc consistency, directional path consistency, and adaptive consistency. The other scheme concerns the prearrangement of variables in a linear order to facilitate an efficient search. In the first series of experiments, we evaluated the effect of each of the local consistency techniques on backtracking and its common enhancement, backjumping. Surprizingly, although adaptive consistency has the best worst-case complexity bounds, we have found that it exhibits the worst performance, unless the constraint graph was very sparse. Directional arc consistency (followed by either backjumping or backtracking) and backjumping (without any pre-processing) outperformed all other techniques; moreover, the former dominated the latter in computationally intensive situations. The second series of experiments suggests that maximum cardinality and minimum width arc the best pre-ordering (i.e., static ordering) strategies, while dynamic search rearrangement is superior to all the preorderings studied

Higher-Level Consistencies: Where, When, and How Much

Determining whether or not a Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) has a solution is NP-complete. CSPs are solved by inference (i.e., enforcing consistency), conditioning (i.e., doing search), or, more commonly, by interleaving the two mechanisms. The most common consistency property enforced during search is Generalized Arc Consistency (GAC). In recent years, new algorithms that enforce consistency properties stronger than GAC have been proposed and shown to be necessary to solve difficult problem instances. We frame the question of balancing the cost and the pruning effectiveness of consistency algorithms as the question of determining where, when, and how much of a higher-level consistency to enforce during search. To answer the `where\u27 question, we exploit the topological structure of a problem instance and target high-level consistency where cycle structures appear. To answer the \u27when\u27 question, we propose a simple, reactive, and effective strategy that monitors the performance of backtrack search and triggers a higher-level consistency as search thrashes. Lastly, for the question of `how much,\u27 we monitor the amount of updates caused by propagation and interrupt the process before it reaches a fixpoint. Empirical evaluations on benchmark problems demonstrate the effectiveness of our strategies. Adviser: B.Y. Choueiry and C. Bessier

Higher-Level Consistencies: Where, When, and How Much

Determining whether or not a Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) has a solution is NP-complete. CSPs are solved by inference (i.e., enforcing consistency), conditioning (i.e., doing search), or, more commonly, by interleaving the two mechanisms. The most common consistency property enforced during search is Generalized Arc Consistency (GAC). In recent years, new algorithms that enforce consistency properties stronger than GAC have been proposed and shown to be necessary to solve difficult problem instances. We frame the question of balancing the cost and the pruning effectiveness of consistency algorithms as the question of determining where, when, and how much of a higher-level consistency to enforce during search. To answer the `where\u27 question, we exploit the topological structure of a problem instance and target high-level consistency where cycle structures appear. To answer the \u27when\u27 question, we propose a simple, reactive, and effective strategy that monitors the performance of backtrack search and triggers a higher-level consistency as search thrashes. Lastly, for the question of `how much,\u27 we monitor the amount of updates caused by propagation and interrupt the process before it reaches a fixpoint. Empirical evaluations on benchmark problems demonstrate the effectiveness of our strategies. Adviser: B.Y. Choueiry and C. Bessier

Higher-Level Consistencies: Where, When, and How Much

Determining whether or not a Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) has a solution is NP-complete. CSPs are solved by inference (i.e., enforcing consistency), conditioning (i.e., doing search), or, more commonly, by interleaving the two mechanisms. The most common consistency property enforced during search is Generalized Arc Consistency (GAC). In recent years, new algorithms that enforce consistency properties stronger than GAC have been proposed and shown to be necessary to solve difficult problem instances. We frame the question of balancing the cost and the pruning effectiveness of consistency algorithms as the question of determining where, when, and how much of a higher-level consistency to enforce during search. To answer the `where\u27 question, we exploit the topological structure of a problem instance and target high-level consistency where cycle structures appear. To answer the \u27when\u27 question, we propose a simple, reactive, and effective strategy that monitors the performance of backtrack search and triggers a higher-level consistency as search thrashes. Lastly, for the question of `how much,\u27 we monitor the amount of updates caused by propagation and interrupt the process before it reaches a fixpoint. Empirical evaluations on benchmark problems demonstrate the effectiveness of our strategies. Adviser: B.Y. Choueiry and C. Bessier

Multi-Dimensional Models Facilitate Automatic Reformulation: The Case Study of the SET Game

In this paper we describe a reformulation strategy for solving multidimensional Constraint Satisfaction Problems (CSPs). This strategy operates by iteratively considering, in isolation, each one of the uni-dimensional constraints in the problem, and exploits the approximate symmetries induced by the selected constraint on the domains in order to enforce this constraint on the simplified problem. We use the game of SET, a combinatorial card game, as a toy problem to motivate our strategy and to explain and illustrate its operation. However, we believe that our approach is applicable to more complex domains of scientific and industrial importance, and deserves more thorough investigations in the future. Our approach sheds a new light on the dynamic reformulation of multidimensional CSPs. Importantly, it advocates that modeling tools for Constraint Programming should allow the user to specify the constraints directly on the attributes of the domain objects (i.e., variables and values) so that their multi-dimensionality can be exploited during problem solving

Decompositions of Grammar Constraints

A wide range of constraints can be compactly specified using automata or formal languages. In a sequence of recent papers, we have shown that an effective means to reason with such specifications is to decompose them into primitive constraints. We can then, for instance, use state of the art SAT solvers and profit from their advanced features like fast unit propagation, clause learning, and conflict-based search heuristics. This approach holds promise for solving combinatorial problems in scheduling, rostering, and configuration, as well as problems in more diverse areas like bioinformatics, software testing and natural language processing. In addition, decomposition may be an effective method to propagate other global constraints.Comment: Proceedings of the Twenty-Third AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligenc

Towards 40 years of constraint reasoning

Research on constraints started in the early 1970s. We are approaching 40 years since the beginning of this successful field, and it is an opportunity to revise what has been reached. This paper is a personal view of the accomplishments in this field. We summarize the main achievements along three dimensions: constraint solving, modelling and programming. We devote special attention to constraint solving, covering popular topics such as search, inference (especially arc consistency), combination of search and inference, symmetry exploitation, global constraints and extensions to the classical model. For space reasons, several topics have been deliberately omitted.Partially supported by the Spanish project TIN2009-13591-C02-02 and Generalitat de Catalunya grant 2009-SGR-1434.Peer Reviewe

A Constraint-Based Planner for Data Production

This paper presents a graph-based backtracking algorithm designed to support constrain-tbased planning in data production domains. This algorithm performs backtracking at two nested levels: the outer- backtracking following the structure of the planning graph to select planner subgoals and actions to achieve them and the inner-backtracking inside a subproblem associated with a selected action to find action parameter values. We show this algorithm works well in a planner applied to automating data production in an ecological forecasting system. We also discuss how the idea of multi-level backtracking may improve efficiency of solving semi-structured constraint problems