| W. Harvey and P. J. Stuckey. Improving linear constraint propagation by changing constraint representation. Constraints, 8:173--207, 2003. |
....on x = y prunes (x; 2) and (y; 3) while arc consistency 9 on the set of constraints fx y; x yg does not. Constraint = is not operationally BC global wrt L, since bound consistency prunes the same values on instances of = or on their L decompositions using instances of and (as shown in [HS03] We now de ne the concept of canonical language, i.e. languages that do not contain useless constraints. Once again, the concept of useless constraints in a language can be de ned semantically, operationally, or algorithmically. In the following, if L is a language and R is a ....
....constraint. Maher s result on CHR, and our observations, also suggests that it would be bene cial to generalize our de nition of canonical languages to include constraint combinators, i.e. ways of combining constraints together in order to de ne new constraints. The work of Harvey and Stuckey [HS03] on constraint reformulation can also be understood in terms of the de nitions in this paper. They compare di erent, semantically equivalent, representations of constraints and show that they are not operationally equivalent. They then investigate various techniques to improve the formulation of ....
W. Harvey and P.J. Stuckey. Improving linear constraint propagation by changing constraint representation. Constraints, 7:173207, 2003.
No context found.
W. Harvey and P. J. Stuckey. Improving linear constraint propagation by changing constraint representation. Constraints, 8:173--207, 2003.
No context found.
Harvey, W., and Stuckey, P. J. Improving linear constraint propagation by changing constraint representation. Constraints: An International Journal 8, 2 (2003), 173--207.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC