Results 1  10
of
462
Partial Constraint Satisfaction
, 1992
"... . A constraint satisfaction problem involves finding values for variables subject to constraints on which combinations of values are allowed. In some cases it may be impossible or impractical to solve these problems completely. We may seek to partially solve the problem, in particular by satisfying ..."
Abstract

Cited by 427 (23 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. A constraint satisfaction problem involves finding values for variables subject to constraints on which combinations of values are allowed. In some cases it may be impossible or impractical to solve these problems completely. We may seek to partially solve the problem, in particular by satisfying a maximal number of constraints. Standard backtracking and local consistency techniques for solving constraint satisfaction problems can be adapted to cope with, and take advantage of, the differences between partial and complete constraint satisfaction. Extensive experimentation on maximal satisfaction problems illuminates the relative and absolute effectiveness of these methods. A general model of partial constraint satisfaction is proposed. 1 Introduction Constraint satisfaction involves finding values for problem variables subject to constraints on acceptable combinations of values. Constraint satisfaction has wide application in artificial intelligence, in areas ranging from temporal r...
Minimizing Conflicts: A Heuristic Repair Method for ConstraintSatisfaction and Scheduling Problems
 J. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH
, 1993
"... This paper describes a simple heuristic approach to solving largescale constraint satisfaction and scheduling problems. In this approach one starts with an inconsistent assignment for a set of variables and searches through the space of possible repairs. The search can be guided by a valueorder ..."
Abstract

Cited by 398 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper describes a simple heuristic approach to solving largescale constraint satisfaction and scheduling problems. In this approach one starts with an inconsistent assignment for a set of variables and searches through the space of possible repairs. The search can be guided by a valueordering heuristic, the minconflicts heuristic, that attempts to minimize the number of constraint violations after each step. The heuristic can be used with a variety of different search strategies. We demonstrate empirically that on the nqueens problem, a technique based on this approach performs orders of magnitude better than traditional backtracking techniques. We also describe a scheduling application where the approach has been used successfully. A theoretical analysis is presented both to explain why this method works well on certain types of problems and to predict when it is likely to be most effective.
GSAT and Dynamic Backtracking
 Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
, 1994
"... There has been substantial recent interest in two new families of search techniques. One family consists of nonsystematic methods such as gsat; the other contains systematic approaches that use a polynomial amount of justification information to prune the search space. This paper introduces a new te ..."
Abstract

Cited by 360 (14 self)
 Add to MetaCart
There has been substantial recent interest in two new families of search techniques. One family consists of nonsystematic methods such as gsat; the other contains systematic approaches that use a polynomial amount of justification information to prune the search space. This paper introduces a new technique that combines these two approaches. The algorithm allows substantial freedom of movement in the search space but enough information is retained to ensure the systematicity of the resulting analysis. Bounds are given for the size of the justification database and conditions are presented that guarantee that this database will be polynomial in the size of the problem in question. 1 INTRODUCTION The past few years have seen rapid progress in the development of algorithms for solving constraintsatisfaction problems, or csps. Csps arise naturally in subfields of AI from planning to vision, and examples include propositional theorem proving, map coloring and scheduling problems. The probl...
The Computational Complexity of Propositional STRIPS Planning
 Artificial Intelligence
, 1994
"... I present several computational complexity results for propositional STRIPS planning, i.e., STRIPS planning restricted to ground formulas. Different planning problems can be defined by restricting the type of formulas, placing limits on the number of pre and postconditions, by restricting negation ..."
Abstract

Cited by 299 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
I present several computational complexity results for propositional STRIPS planning, i.e., STRIPS planning restricted to ground formulas. Different planning problems can be defined by restricting the type of formulas, placing limits on the number of pre and postconditions, by restricting negation in pre and postconditions, and by requiring optimal plans. For these types of restrictions, I show when planning is tractable (polynomial) and intractable (NPhard) . In general, it is PSPACEcomplete to determine if a given planning instance has any solutions. Extremely severe restrictions on both the operators and the formulas are required to guarantee polynomial time or even NPcompleteness. For example, when only ground literals are permitted, determining plan existence is PSPACEcomplete even if operators are limited to two preconditions and two postconditions. When definite Horn ground formulas are permitted, determining plan existence is PSPACEcomplete even if operators are limited t...
Contradicting Conventional Wisdom in Constraint Satisfaction
, 1994
"... . Constraint satisfaction problems have wide application in artificial intelligence. They involve finding values for problem variables where the values must be consistent in that they satisfy restrictions on which combinations of values are allowed. Two standard techniques used in solving such p ..."
Abstract

Cited by 206 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. Constraint satisfaction problems have wide application in artificial intelligence. They involve finding values for problem variables where the values must be consistent in that they satisfy restrictions on which combinations of values are allowed. Two standard techniques used in solving such problems are backtrack search and consistency inference. Conventional wisdom in the constraint satisfaction community suggests: 1) using consistency inference as preprocessing before search to prune values from consideration reduces subsequent search effort and 2) using consistency inference during search to prune values from consideration is best done at the limited level embodied in the forward checking algorithm. We present evidence contradicting both pieces of conventional wisdom, and suggesting renewed consideration of an approach which fully maintains arc consistency during backtrack search. 1 Introduction Constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs) involve finding values for prob...
Algorithms for Distributed Constraint Satisfaction: A Review
 In CP
, 2000
"... . When multiple agents are in a shared environment, there usually exist constraints among the possible actions of these agents. A distributed constraint satisfaction problem (distributed CSP) is a problem to find a consistent combination of actions that satisfies these interagent constraints. Vario ..."
Abstract

Cited by 203 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. When multiple agents are in a shared environment, there usually exist constraints among the possible actions of these agents. A distributed constraint satisfaction problem (distributed CSP) is a problem to find a consistent combination of actions that satisfies these interagent constraints. Various application problems in multiagent systems can be formalized as distributed CSPs. This paper gives an overview of the existing research on distributed CSPs. First, we briefly describe the problem formalization and algorithms of normal, centralized CSPs. Then, we show the problem formalization and several MAS application problems of distributed CSPs. Furthermore, we describe a series of algorithms for solving distributed CSPs, i.e., the asynchronous backtracking, the asynchronous weakcommitment search, the distributed breakout, and distributed consistency algorithms. Finally,we showtwo extensions of the basic problem formalization of distributed CSPs, i.e., handling multiple local variables, and dealing with overconstrained problems. Keywords: Constraint Satisfaction, Search, distributed AI 1.
ASSAT: Computing Answer Sets of a Logic Program by SAT Solvers
 Artificial Intelligence
, 2002
"... We propose a new translation from normal logic programs with constraints under the answer set semantics to propositional logic. Given a normal logic program, we show that by adding, for each loop in the program, a corresponding loop formula to the programâ€™s completion, we obtain a onetoone corresp ..."
Abstract

Cited by 201 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We propose a new translation from normal logic programs with constraints under the answer set semantics to propositional logic. Given a normal logic program, we show that by adding, for each loop in the program, a corresponding loop formula to the programâ€™s completion, we obtain a onetoone correspondence between the answer sets of the program and the models of the resulting propositional theory. In the worst case, there may be an exponential number of loops in a logic program. To address this problem, we propose an approach that adds loop formulas a few at a time, selectively. Based on these results, we implement a system called ASSAT(X), depending on the SAT solver X used, for computing one answer set of a normal logic program with constraints. We test the system on a variety of benchmarks including the graph coloring, the blocks world planning, and Hamiltonian Circuit domains. Our experimental results show that in these domains, for the task of generating one answer set of a normal logic program, our system has a clear edge over the stateofart answer set programming systems Smodels and DLV. 1 1
Remote Agent: To Boldly Go Where No AI System Has Gone Before
, 1998
"... Renewed motives for space exploration have inspired NASA to work toward the goal of establishing a virtual presence in space, through heterogeneous effets of robotic explorers. Information technology, and Artificial Intelligence in particular, will play a central role in this endeavor by endowing th ..."
Abstract

Cited by 188 (16 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Renewed motives for space exploration have inspired NASA to work toward the goal of establishing a virtual presence in space, through heterogeneous effets of robotic explorers. Information technology, and Artificial Intelligence in particular, will play a central role in this endeavor by endowing these explorers with a form of computational intelligence that we call remote agents. In this paper we describe the Remote Agent, a specific autonomous agent architecture based on the principles of modelbased programming, onboard deduction and search, and goaldirected closedloop commanding, that takes a significant step toward enabling this future. This architecture addresses the unique characteristics of the spacecraft domain that require highly reliable autonomous operations over long periods of time with tight deadlines, resource constraints, and concurrent activity among tightly coupled subsystems. The Remote Agent integrates constraintbased temporal planning and scheduling, robust multithreaded execution, and modelbased mode identification and reconfiguration. The demonstration of the integrated system as an onboard controller for Deep Space One, NASA's rst New Millennium mission, is scheduled for a period of a week in late 1998. The development of the Remote Agent also provided the opportunity to reassess some of AI's conventional wisdom about the challenges of implementing embedded systems, tractable reasoning, and knowledge representation. We discuss these issues, and our often contrary experiences, throughout the paper.
Improvements To Propositional Satisfiability Search Algorithms
, 1995
"... ... quickly across a wide range of hard SAT problems than any other SAT tester in the literature on comparable platforms. On a Sun SPARCStation 10 running SunOS 4.1.3 U1, POSIT can solve hard random 400variable 3SAT problems in about 2 hours on the average. In general, it can solve hard nvariable ..."
Abstract

Cited by 161 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
... quickly across a wide range of hard SAT problems than any other SAT tester in the literature on comparable platforms. On a Sun SPARCStation 10 running SunOS 4.1.3 U1, POSIT can solve hard random 400variable 3SAT problems in about 2 hours on the average. In general, it can solve hard nvariable random 3SAT problems with search trees of size O(2 n=18:7 ). In addition to justifying these claims, this dissertation describes the most significant achievements of other researchers in this area, and discusses all of the widely known general techniques for speeding up SAT search algorithms. It should be useful to anyone interested in NPcomplete problems or combinatorial optimization in general, and it should be particularly useful to researchers in either Artificial Intelligence or Operations Research.
Testing Heuristics: We Have It All Wrong
 Journal of Heuristics
, 1995
"... The competitive nature of most algorithmic experimentation is a source of problems that are all too familiar to the research community. It is hard to make fair comparisons between algorithms and to assemble realistic test problems. Competitive testing tells us which algorithm is faster but not w ..."
Abstract

Cited by 119 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The competitive nature of most algorithmic experimentation is a source of problems that are all too familiar to the research community. It is hard to make fair comparisons between algorithms and to assemble realistic test problems. Competitive testing tells us which algorithm is faster but not why. Because it requires polished code, it consumes time and energy that could be spent doing more experiments. This paper argues that a more scientific approach of controlled experimentation, similar to that used in other empirical sciences, avoids or alleviates these problems. We have confused research and development; competitive testing is suited only for the latter. Most experimental studies of heuristic algorithms resemble track meets more than scientific endeavors. Typically an investigator has a bright idea for a new algorithm and wants to show that it works better, in some sense, than known algorithms. This requires computational tests, perhaps on a standard set of benchmark p...