Skip to main content

Exploiting Functional Dependencies in Declarative Problem Specifications

  • Conference paper
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2004)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 3229))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this paper we tackle the issue of the automatic recognition of functional dependencies among guessed predicates in constraint problem specifications. Functional dependencies arise frequently in pure declarative specifications, because of the intermediate results that need to be computed in order to express some of the constraints, or due to precise modelling choices, e.g., to provide multiple viewpoints of the search space in order to increase propagation. In either way, the recognition of dependencies greatly helps solvers, letting them avoid spending search on unfruitful branches, while maintaining the highest degree of declarativeness. By modelling constraint problem specifications as second-order formulae, we provide a characterization of functional dependencies in terms of semantic properties of first-order ones. Additionally, we show how suitable search procedures can be automatically synthesized in order to exploit recognized dependencies. We present opl examples of various problems, from bio-informatics, planning and resource allocation fields, and show how in many cases opl greatly benefits from the addition of such search procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brown, C.A., Finkelstein, L., Purdom, P.W.: Backtrack searching in the presence of symmetry. In: Mora, T. (ed.) AAECC 1988. LNCS, vol. 357, pp. 99–110. Springer, Heidelberg (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cadoli, M., Mancini, T.: Detecting and breaking symmetries on specifications. In: Proc. of the CP 2003 Int. Workshop on Symmetry in CSPs, pp. 13–26 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cadoli, M., Mancini, T.: Automated reformulation of specifications by safe delay of constraints. In: Proc. of KR 2004, pp. 388–398. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cadoli, M., Mancini, T.: Using a theorem prover for reasoning on constraint problems. In: Proc. of the ETAPS 2004 CP+CV Int. Workshop, pp. 17–31 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cadoli, M., Schaerf, A.: Compiling problem specifications into SAT. In: Sands, D. (ed.) ESOP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2028, pp. 387–401. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Chang, C.C., Keisler, H.J.: Model Theory, 3rd edn. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1990)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Cheng, B.M.W., Choi, K.M.F., Lee, J.H.-M., Wu, J.C.K.: Increasing constraint propagation by redundant modeling: an experience report. Constraints 4(2), 167–192 (1999)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Crawford, J.M., Ginsberg, M.L., Luks, E.M., Roy, A.: Symmetry-breaking predicates for search problems. In: Proc. of KR 1996, pp. 148–159 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Crescenzi, P., Goldman, D., Papadimitriou, C.H., Piccolboni, A., Yannakakis, M.: On the complexity of protein folding. J. of Comp. Biology 5(3), 423–466 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dechter, R.: Constraint networks (survey). In: Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, 2nd edn., pp. 276–285. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chichester (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ebbinghaus, H.D., Flum, J.: Finite Model Theory. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Eiter, T., Leone, N., Mateis, C., Pfeifer, G., Scarcello, F.: The KR system dlv: Progress report, Comparisons and Benchmarks. In: Proc. of KR 1998, pp. 406–417 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fagin, R.: Generalized First-Order Spectra and Polynomial-Time Recognizable Sets. In: Karp, R.M. (ed.) Complexity of Computation, pp. 43–74. AMS (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fourer, R., Gay, D.M., Kernigham, B.W.: AMPL: A Modeling Language for Mathematical Programming. International Thomson Publishing (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S.: Computers and Intractability—A guide to NPcompleteness. W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Giunchiglia, E., Sebastiani, R.: Applying the davis-putnam procedure to non-clausal formulas. In: Lamma, E., Mello, P. (eds.) AI*IA 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1792, pp. 84–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Hart, W., Istrail, S.: HP Benchmarks, Available at http://www.cs.sandia.gov/tech_reports/compbio/tortilla-hp-benchmarks.html

  18. Hnich, T., Walsh, T.: Why Channel? Multiple viewpoints for branching heuristics. In: Proc. of the CP 2003 Int. Workshop on Modelling and Reformulating CSPs: Towards Systematisation and Automation (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kautz, H., Selman, B.: Pushing the envelope: Planning, propositional logic, and stochastic search. In: Proc. of AAAI 1996, pp. 1194–1201 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lau, K.F., Dill, K.A.: A lattice statistical mechanics model of the conformational and sequence spaces of proteins. Macromolecules 22, 3986–3997 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Li, C.M.: Integrating equivalency reasoning into Davis-Putnam procedure. In: Proc. of AAAI 2000, AAAI/MIT Press (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Niemelä, I.: Logic programs with stable model semantics as a constraint programming paradigm. Ann. of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 25(3,4), 241–273 (1999)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Nilsson, N.J.: Principles of Artificial Intelligence. Tioga Publishing Co. (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Smith, B.M., Stergiou, K., Walsh, T.: Using auxiliary variables and implied constraints to model non-binary problems. In: Proc. of AAAI 2000, pp. 182–187 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Van Hentenryck, P.: The OPL Optimization Programming Language. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Walsh, T.: Permutation Problems and Channelling Constraints. In: Nieuwenhuis, R., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2250, pp. 377–391. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Warren, D.H.D.: Extract from Kluzniak and Szapowicz APIC studies in data processing, no. 24, 1974. In: Readings in Planning, pp. 140–153. Morgan Kaufman, San Francisco (1990)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Cadoli, M., Mancini, T. (2004). Exploiting Functional Dependencies in Declarative Problem Specifications. In: Alferes, J.J., Leite, J. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3229. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30227-8_52

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30227-8_52

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-23242-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-30227-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics