Advertisement

Cardinality Networks and Their Applications

  • Roberto Asín
  • Robert Nieuwenhuis
  • Albert Oliveras
  • Enric Rodríguez-Carbonell
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5584)

Abstract

We introduce Cardinality Networks, a new CNF encoding of cardinality constraints. It improves upon the previously existing encodings such as the sorting networks of [ES06] in that it requires much less clauses and auxiliary variables, while arc consistency is still preserved: e.g., for a constraint x 1 + ... + x n  ≤ k, as soon as k variables among the x i ’s become true, unit propagation sets all other x i ’s to false. Our encoding also still admits incremental strengthening: this constraint for any smaller k is obtained without adding any new clauses, by setting a single variable to false.

Here we give precise recursive definitions of the clause sets that are needed and give detailed proofs of the required properties. We demonstrate the practical impact of this new encoding by careful experiments comparing it with previous encodings on real-world instances.

Keywords

Auxiliary Variable Unit Propagation Cardinality Constraint Sorting Network Incremental Strengthen 
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. [Bat68]
    Batcher, K.E.: Sorting Networks and their Applications. In: AFIPS Spring Joint Computing Conference, pp. 307–314 (1968)Google Scholar
  2. [BB03]
    Bailleux, O., Boufkhad, Y.: Efficient CNF encoding of Boolean Cardinality Constraints. In: Rossi, F. (ed.) CP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2833, pp. 108–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [DLL62]
    Davis, M., Logemann, G., Loveland, D.: A Machine Program for Theorem-Proving. Communications of the ACM, CACM 5(7), 394–397 (1962)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [DP60]
    Davis, M., Putnam, H.: A Computing Procedure for Quantification Theory. Journal of the ACM, JACM 7(3), 201–215 (1960)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [ES06]
    Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: Translating Pseudo-Boolean Constraints into SAT. Journal on Satisfiability, Boolean Modeling and Computation 2, 1–26 (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. [MSP08]
    Marques-Silva, J., Planes, J.: Algorithms for Maximum Satisfiability usint Unsatisfiable Cores. In: DATE 2008, pp. 408–413. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  7. [Sin05]
    Sinz, C.: Towards an optimal CNF encoding of boolean cardinality constraints. In: van Beek, P. (ed.) CP 2005, vol. 3709, pp. 827–831. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [SL07]
    Marques-Silva, J.P., Lynce, I.: Towards robust CNF encodings of cardinality constraints. In: Bessière, C. (ed.) CP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4741, pp. 483–497. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roberto Asín
  • Robert Nieuwenhuis
  • Albert Oliveras
  • Enric Rodríguez-Carbonell

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations