Optimal and efficient filtering algorithms for table constraints
- 158 Downloads
Filtering algorithms for table constraints can be classified in two categories: constraint-based and value-based. In the constraint-based approaches, the propagation queue only contains information on the constraints that must be reconsidered. For the value-based approaches, the propagation queue also contains information on the removed values. This paper proposes five efficient value-based algorithms for table constraints. Two of them (AC5TCOpt-Tr and AC5TCOpt-Sparse) are proved to have an optimal time complexity of O(r·t+r·d) per table constraint. Substantial experimental results are presented. An empirical analysis is conducted on the effect of the arity of the tables. The experiments show that our propagators are the best when the arity of the table is 3 or 4. Indeed, on instances containing only binary constraints, our algorithms are outperformed by classical AC algorithm AC3rm. AC3rm is dedicated to binary constraints. However, all our algorithms outperform existing state-of-the-art constraint based STR2+ and MDD c and the optimal value-based STR3 algorithms on those instances. On instances with small arity tables (up to arity 4), all our algorithms are generally faster than STR2+, MDD c and than STR3. AC5TCOpt-Sparse is globally the best propagator on those benchmarks. On benchmarks containing large arity tables (arity 5 or more), each of the three existing state-of-the-art algorithms is the winning strategy on one different benchmark.
KeywordsPropagation Consistency Filtering algorithms Table constraints
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.van Beek, P. (2006). Backtracking search algorithm. In Rossi, F., Beek, P.v., Walsh, T. (Eds.), Handbook of Constraint Programming (Foundations of Artificial Intelligence). New York: Elsevier Science Inc.Google Scholar
- 3.Bessière, C. (2006). Constraint propagation. In Rossi, F., Beek, P.v., Walsh, T. (Eds.), Handbook of Constraint Programming (Foundations of Artificial Intelligence). New York: Elsevier Science Inc.Google Scholar
- 4.Bessière, C., & Régin, J. C. (1997). Arc consistency for general constraint networks: preliminary results. IJCAI, (1), 398–404.Google Scholar
- 6.Carlsson, M. (2006). Filtering for the case constraint, talk given at the advanced school on global constraints.Google Scholar
- 8.Deville, Y., & Van Hentenryck, P. (2010). Domain consistency with forbidden values. In Proceedings of CP 2010, pp. 191–205. Springer.Google Scholar
- 11.Gent, I. P., Jefferson, C., Miguel, I. (2006). Watched literals for constraint propagation in Minion. In Proceedings of CP 2006 (pp. 182–197). Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- 12.Gent, I. P., Jefferson, C., Miguel, I., Nightingale, P. (2007). Data structures for generalised arc consistency for extensional constraints. In Proceedings of the AAAI 07 (pp. 191–197). AAAI Press.Google Scholar
- 13.Katsirelos, G., & Walsh, T. (2007). A compression algorithm for large arity extensional constraints. In Proceedings of CP 2007 (pp. 379–393). Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- 14.Lecoutre, C. Instances of the Constraint Solver Competition. http://www.cril.fr/~lecoutre/.
- 15.Lecoutre, C. (2009). Constraint Networks: Techniques and Algorithms. ISTE/Wiley.Google Scholar
- 17.Lecoutre, C., & Szymanek, R. (2006). Generalized arc consistency for positive table constraints. In Proceedings of CP 2006 (pp. 284–298).Google Scholar
- 18.Lecoutre, C., Hemery, F., etal (2007). A study of residual supports in arc consistency. In Proceedings of IJCAI 2007 (vol.7, pp. 125–130).Google Scholar
- 19.Lecoutre, C., Likitvivatanavong, C., Yap, R. (2012). A path-optimal gac algorithm for table constraints. In Proceedings of ECAI 2012 (pp. 510–515).Google Scholar
- 20.Lhomme, O. (2004). Arc-consistency filtering algorithms for logical combinations of constraints. In Proceedings of CPAIOR 2004 (pp. 209–224).Google Scholar
- 21.Lhomme, O., & Régin, J. C. (2005). A fast arc consistency algorithm for n-ary constraints. In Proceedings of the nationnal conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 405–410). AAAI Press.Google Scholar
- 22.Mairy, J. B., Van Hentenryck, P., Deville, Y. (2012). An optimal filtering algorithm for table constraints. In Proceedings of CP 2012 (vol. 3709, pp. 496–511). Springer: Berlin.Google Scholar
- 23.Mohr, R., & Masini, G. (1988). Good old discrete relaxation. In Proceedings of ECAI 1988 (pp. 651–656).Google Scholar
- 24.Perron, L., & Furnon, V. or-tools. http://code.google.com/p/or-tools.
- 25.Pesant, G. (2004). A regular language membership constraint for finite sequences of variables. In Proceedings of CP 2004 (pp. 482–495). Springer.Google Scholar
- 26.Quimper, C. G., & Walsh, T. (2006). Global grammar constraints. In Proceedings of CP 2006 (pp. 751–755). Springer.Google Scholar
- 27.Régin, J. C. (2011). Improving the expressiveness of table constraints. In Proceedings of ModRef 2011, Workshop held with CP 2011.Google Scholar
- 32.Wallace, R. (2005). Factor analytic studies of csp heuristics. In Proceedings of CP 2005 (vol. 3709, pp. 712–726). Springer: Berlin / Heidelberg.Google Scholar