Advertisement

The Propagation Depth of Local Consistency

  • Christoph Berkholz
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8656)

Abstract

We establish optimal bounds on the number of nested propagation steps in k-consistency tests. It is known that local consistency algorithms such as arc-, path- and k-consistency are not efficiently parallelizable. Their inherent sequential nature is caused by long chains of nested propagation steps, which cannot be executed in parallel. This motivates the question “What is the minimum number of nested propagation steps that have to be performed by k-consistency algorithms on (binary) constraint networks with n variables and domain size d?”

It was known before that 2-consistency requires Ω(nd) and 3-consistency requires Ω(n 2) sequential propagation steps. We answer the question exhaustively for every k ≥ 2: there are binary constraint networks where any k-consistency procedure has to perform Ω(n k − 1 d k − 1) nested propagation steps before local inconsistencies were detected. This bound is tight, because the overall number of propagation steps performed by k-consistency is at most n k − 1 d k − 1.

Keywords

Propagation Step Critical Position Winning Strategy Constraint Network Local Consistency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Atserias, A., Kolaitis, P.G., Vardi, M.Y.: Constraint propagation as a proof system. In: Wallace, M. (ed.) CP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3258, pp. 77–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berkholz, C.: The Propagation Depth of Local Consistency. ArXiv e-prints (2014), http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.4679
  3. 3.
    Berkholz, C.: Lower bounds for existential pebble games and k-consistency tests. Logical Methods in Computer Science 9(4) (2013), http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.0679
  4. 4.
    Berkholz, C., Verbitsky, O.: On the speed of constraint propagation and the time complexity of arc consistency testing. In: Chatterjee, K., Sgall, J. (eds.) MFCS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8087, pp. 159–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cooper, M.C.: An optimal k-consistency algorithm. Artificial Intelligence 41(1), 89–95 (1989)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dechter, R., Pearl, J.: A problem simplification approach that generates heuristics for constraint-satisfaction problems. Tech. rep., Cognitive Systems Laboratory, Computer Science Department, University of California, Los Angeles (1985)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Feder, T., Vardi, M.Y.: The computational structure of monotone monadic snp and constraint satisfaction: A study through datalog and group theory. SIAM Journal on Computing 28(1), 57–104 (1998)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Freuder, E.C.: Synthesizing constraint expressions. Commun. ACM 21, 958–966 (1978)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gaspers, S., Szeider, S.: The parameterized complexity of local consistency. In: Lee, J. (ed.) CP 2011. LNCS, vol. 6876, pp. 302–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kasif, S.: On the parallel complexity of discrete relaxation in constraint satisfaction networks. Artificial Intelligence 45(3), 275–286 (1990)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kolaitis, P.G., Panttaja, J.: On the complexity of existential pebble games. In: Baaz, M., Makowsky, J.A. (eds.) CSL 2003. LNCS, vol. 2803, pp. 314–329. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kolaitis, P.G., Vardi, M.Y.: On the expressive power of datalog: Tools and a case study. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 51(1), 110–134 (1995)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kolaitis, P.G., Vardi, M.Y.: A game-theoretic approach to constraint satisfaction. In: Proc AAAI/IAAI 2000, pp. 175–181 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ladkin, P.B., Maddux, R.D.: On binary constraint problems. J. ACM 41(3), 435–469 (1994), http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/176584.176585 CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Samal, A., Henderson, T.: Parallel consistent labeling algorithms. International Journal of Parallel Programming 16, 341–364 (1987)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Susswein, S., Henderson, T., Zachary, J., Hansen, C., Hinker, P., Marsden, G.: Parallel path consistency. International Journal of Parallel Programming 20(6), 453–473 (1991), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01547895 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Berkholz
    • 1
  1. 1.RWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations