Results 11  20
of
233
Resolution versus Search: Two Strategies for SAT
 Journal of Automated Reasoning
, 2000
"... The paper compares two popular strategies for solving propositional satisfiability, backtracking search and resolution, and analyzes the complexity of a directional resolution algorithm (DR) as a function of the "width" (w) of the problem's graph. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 58 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The paper compares two popular strategies for solving propositional satisfiability, backtracking search and resolution, and analyzes the complexity of a directional resolution algorithm (DR) as a function of the "width" (w) of the problem's graph.
Hybrid backtracking bounded by treedecomposition of constraint networks
 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
, 2003
"... We propose a framework for solving CSPs based both on backtracking techniques and on the notion of treedecomposition of the constraint networks. This mixed approach permits us to define a new framework for the enumeration, which we expect that it will benefit from the advantages of two approaches: ..."
Abstract

Cited by 58 (15 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We propose a framework for solving CSPs based both on backtracking techniques and on the notion of treedecomposition of the constraint networks. This mixed approach permits us to define a new framework for the enumeration, which we expect that it will benefit from the advantages of two approaches: a practical efficiency of enumerative algorithms and a warranty of a limited time complexity by an approximation of the treewidth of the constraint networks. Finally, experimental results allow us to show the advantages of this approach.
Russian Doll Search for Solving Constraint Optimization Problems
 Proceedings AAAI
, 1996
"... If the Constraint Satisfaction framework has been extended to deal with Constraint Optimization problems, it appears that optimization is far more complex than satisfaction. One of the causes of the inefficiency of complete tree search methods, like Depth First Branch and Bound, lies in the poor qua ..."
Abstract

Cited by 52 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
If the Constraint Satisfaction framework has been extended to deal with Constraint Optimization problems, it appears that optimization is far more complex than satisfaction. One of the causes of the inefficiency of complete tree search methods, like Depth First Branch and Bound, lies in the poor quality of the lower bound on the global valuation of a partial assignment, even when using Forward Checking techniques. In this paper, we introduce the Russian Doll Search algorithm which replaces one search by n successive searches on nested subproblems (n being the number of problem variables), records the results of each search and uses them later, when solving larger subproblems, in order to improve the lower bound on the global valuation of any partial assignment. On small random problems and on large real scheduling problems, this algorithm yields surprisingly good results, which greatly improve as the problems get more constrained and the bandwidth of the used variable ordering diminish...
The Constrainedness of Arc Consistency
 in Proceedings of CP97
, 1997
"... . We show that the same methodology used to study phase transition behaviour in NPcomplete problems works with a polynomial problem class: establishing arc consistency. A general measure of the constrainedness of an ensemble of problems, used to locate phase transitions in random NPcomplete proble ..."
Abstract

Cited by 50 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
. We show that the same methodology used to study phase transition behaviour in NPcomplete problems works with a polynomial problem class: establishing arc consistency. A general measure of the constrainedness of an ensemble of problems, used to locate phase transitions in random NPcomplete problems, predicts the location of a phase transition in establishing arc consistency. A complexity peak for the AC3 algorithm is associated with this transition. Finite size scaling models both the scaling of this transition and the computational cost. On problems at the phase transition, this model of computational cost agrees with the theoretical worst case. As with NPcomplete problems, constrainedness  and proxies for it which are cheaper to compute  can be used as a heuristic for reducing the number of checks needed to establish arc consistency in AC3. 1 Introduction Following [4] there has been considerable research into phase transition behaviour in NPcomplete problems. Problems from...
MAC and Combined Heuristics: Two Reasons to Forsake FC (and CBJ?) on Hard Problems
 In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming
, 1996
"... . In the last twenty years, many algorithms and heuristics were developed to find solutions in constraint networks. Their number increased to such an extent that it quickly became necessary to compare their performances in order to propose a small number of "good" methods. These comparison ..."
Abstract

Cited by 49 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
. In the last twenty years, many algorithms and heuristics were developed to find solutions in constraint networks. Their number increased to such an extent that it quickly became necessary to compare their performances in order to propose a small number of "good" methods. These comparisons often led us to consider FC or FCCBJ associated with a "minimum domain" variable ordering heuristic as the best techniques to solve a wide variety of constraint networks. In this paper, we first try to convince once and for all the CSP community that MAC is not only more efficient than FC to solve large practical problems, but it is also really more efficient than FC on hard and large random problems. Afterwards, we introduce an original and efficient way to combine variable ordering heuristics. Finally, we conjecture that when a good variable ordering heuristic is used, CBJ becomes an expensive gadget which almost always slows down the search, even if it saves a few constraint checks. 1 Introducti...
From Restricted Path Consistency to MaxRestricted Path Consistency
 PROCEEDINGS OF THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE OF CONSTRAINT PROGRAMMING (CP97
, 1997
"... There is no need to show the importance of the filtering techniques to solve constraint satisfaction problems i.e. to find values for problem variables subject to constraints that specify whichcombinations of values are consistent. They can be used during a preprocessingstep to remove once and for a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 46 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
There is no need to show the importance of the filtering techniques to solve constraint satisfaction problems i.e. to find values for problem variables subject to constraints that specify whichcombinations of values are consistent. They can be used during a preprocessingstep to remove once and for all some local inconsistencies, or duringthesearch toefficiently prunethe search tree. Recently, in [5], a comparison of the most practicable filteringtechniques concludes that restricted pathconsistency (RPC) is a promising local consistency that requires little additional cpu time compared to arc consistency while removing most of thepathinverse inconsistentvalues. However, the RPC algorithm used for this comparison (presented in [1] and called RPC1 in the following) has a non optimal worst case time complexity and bad average timeand space complexities. Therefore, we propose RPC2, a new RPC algorithm with O(end 2 )worst case time complexity and requiring less space than RPC1 in practice. The second aim of this paper is to extend RPC tonew local consistencies, kRPC and MaxRPC, andto compare their pruning efficiency withtheother practicable local consistencies. Furthermore, we propose andstudy a MaxRPC algorithm based on AC6 thatwe used for this comparison.
Backjumpbased backtracking for constraint satisfaction problems
 Artificial Intelligence
"... The performance of backtracking algorithms for solving nitedomain constraint satisfaction problems can be improved substantially by lookback and lookahead methods. Lookback techniques extract information by analyzing failing search paths that are terminated by deadends. Lookahead techniques ..."
Abstract

Cited by 44 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The performance of backtracking algorithms for solving nitedomain constraint satisfaction problems can be improved substantially by lookback and lookahead methods. Lookback techniques extract information by analyzing failing search paths that are terminated by deadends. Lookahead techniques use constraint propagation algorithms to avoid such deadends altogether. This survey describes a number of lookback variants including backjumping and constraint recording which recognize and avoid some unnecessary explorations of the search space. The last portion of the paper gives an overview of lookahead methods such as forward checking and dynamic variable ordering, and discusses their combination with backjumping.
Propositional Satisfiability and Constraint Programming: a Comparative Survey
 ACM Computing Surveys
, 2006
"... Propositional Satisfiability (SAT) and Constraint Programming (CP) have developed as two relatively independent threads of research, crossfertilising occasionally. These two approaches to problem solving have a lot in common, as evidenced by similar ideas underlying the branch and prune algorithms ..."
Abstract

Cited by 38 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Propositional Satisfiability (SAT) and Constraint Programming (CP) have developed as two relatively independent threads of research, crossfertilising occasionally. These two approaches to problem solving have a lot in common, as evidenced by similar ideas underlying the branch and prune algorithms that are most successful at solving both kinds of problems. They also exhibit differences in the way they are used to state and solve problems, since SAT’s approach is in general a blackbox approach, while CP aims at being tunable and programmable. This survey overviews the two areas in a comparative way, emphasising the similarities and differences between the two and the points where we feel that one technology can benefit from ideas or experience acquired
Adaptive Constraint Satisfaction: The Quickest First Principle
 EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
, 1996
"... The choice of a particular algorithm for solving a given class of constraint satisfaction problems is often confused by exceptional behaviour of algorithms. One method of reducing the impact of this exceptional behaviour is to adopt an adaptive philosophy to constraint satisfaction problem solving. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 35 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The choice of a particular algorithm for solving a given class of constraint satisfaction problems is often confused by exceptional behaviour of algorithms. One method of reducing the impact of this exceptional behaviour is to adopt an adaptive philosophy to constraint satisfaction problem solving. In this report we describe one such adaptive algorithm, based on the principle of chaining. It is designed to avoid the phenomenon of exceptionally hard problem instances. Our algorithm shows how the speed of more naïve algorithms can be utilised safe in the knowledge that the exceptional behaviour can be bounded. Our work clearly demonstrates the potential benefits of the adaptive approach and opens a new front of research for the constraint satisfaction community.