aspeed: Solver scheduling via answer set programming 1

Although Boolean Constraint Technology has made tremendous progress over the last decade, the efficacy of state-of-the-art solvers is known to vary considerably across different types of problem instances, and is known to depend strongly on algorithm parameters. This problem was addressed by means of a simple, yet effective approach using handmade, uniform, and unordered schedules of multiple solvers in ppfolio, which showed very impressive performance in the 2011 Satisfiability Testing (SAT) Competition. Inspired by this, we take advantage of the modeling and solving capacities of Answer Set Programming (ASP) to automatically determine more refined, that is, nonuniform and ordered solver schedules from the existing benchmarking data. We begin by formulating the determination of such schedules as multi-criteria optimization problems and provide corresponding ASP encodings. The resulting encodings are easily customizable for different settings, and the computation of optimum schedules can mostly be done in the blink of an eye, even when dealing with large runtime data sets stemming from many solvers on hundreds to thousands of instances. Also, the fact that our approach can be customized easily enabled us to swiftly adapt it to generate parallel schedules for multi-processor machines.

[1]  Pedro Barahona,et al.  PSICO: Solving Protein Structures with Constraint Programming and Optimization , 2002, Constraints.

[2]  Kevin Leyton-Brown,et al.  Hierarchical Hardness Models for SAT , 2007, CP.

[3]  Torsten Schaub,et al.  Unsatisfiability-based optimization in clasp , 2012, ICLP.

[4]  Martin Gebser,et al.  Answer Set Solving in Practice , 2012, Answer Set Solving in Practice.

[5]  Mario Alviano,et al.  The Third Answer Set Programming Competition: Preliminary Report of the System Competition Track , 2011, LPNMR.

[6]  Jürgen Schmidhuber,et al.  Learning dynamic algorithm portfolios , 2006, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[7]  Barry O'Sullivan,et al.  Evolving Instance Specific Algorithm Configuration , 2021, SOCS.

[8]  Kevin Leyton-Brown,et al.  Evaluating Component Solver Contributions to Portfolio-Based Algorithm Selectors , 2012, SAT.

[9]  Carlos Ansótegui,et al.  A Gender-Based Genetic Algorithm for the Automatic Configuration of Algorithms , 2009, CP.

[10]  Yuri Malitsky,et al.  Algorithm Selection and Scheduling , 2011, CP.

[11]  Kevin Leyton-Brown,et al.  Hydra: Automatically Configuring Algorithms for Portfolio-Based Selection , 2010, AAAI.

[12]  Jendrik Seipp,et al.  Learning Portfolios of Automatically Tuned Planners , 2012, ICAPS.

[13]  Marius Thomas Lindauer,et al.  Quantifying Homogeneity of Instance Sets for Algorithm Configuration , 2012, LION.

[14]  John R. Rice,et al.  The Algorithm Selection Problem , 1976, Adv. Comput..

[15]  Kevin Leyton-Brown,et al.  SATzilla: Portfolio-based Algorithm Selection for SAT , 2008, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[16]  Jean-Charles Régin,et al.  Integration of AI and OR Techniques in Constraint Programming for Combinatorial Optimization Problems , 2004, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[17]  Brahim Hnich,et al.  Making Choices Using Structure at the Instance Level within a Case Based Reasoning Framework , 2004, CPAIOR.

[18]  Marius Thomas Lindauer,et al.  Potassco: The Potsdam Answer Set Solving Collection , 2011, AI Commun..

[19]  Yuri Malitsky,et al.  ISAC - Instance-Specific Algorithm Configuration , 2010, ECAI.

[20]  William H. Hsu,et al.  A Learning-Based Algorithm Selection Meta-reasoner for the Real-Time MPE Problem , 2004, Australian Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[21]  Kevin Leyton-Brown,et al.  Sequential Model-Based Optimization for General Algorithm Configuration , 2011, LION.

[22]  Tad Hogg,et al.  An Economics Approach to Hard Computational Problems , 1997, Science.

[23]  Wolfgang Faber,et al.  Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning , 2011, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[24]  Chitta Baral,et al.  Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Declarative Problem Solving , 2003 .

[25]  Stephen F. Smith,et al.  Combining Multiple Heuristics Online , 2007, AAAI.

[26]  Marius Thomas Lindauer,et al.  Robust Benchmark Set Selection for Boolean Constraint Solvers , 2013, LION.

[27]  Martin Gebser,et al.  Conflict-driven answer set solving: From theory to practice , 2012, Artif. Intell..

[28]  Luca Pulina,et al.  A self-adaptive multi-engine solver for quantified Boolean formulas , 2009, Constraints.

[29]  Yuri Malitsky,et al.  Parallel SAT Solver Selection and Scheduling , 2012, CP.

[30]  Marius Thomas Lindauer,et al.  A Portfolio Solver for Answer Set Programming: Preliminary Report , 2011, LPNMR.

[31]  Lars Kotthoff,et al.  Learning When to Use Lazy Learning in Constraint Solving , 2010, ECAI.

[32]  Susan L. Epstein,et al.  Learning Algorithm Portfolios for Parallel Execution , 2012, LION.

[33]  Andrew Coles,et al.  Proceedings of the Nineteenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI-10) , 2010, ECAI 2010.

[34]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Handbook of satisfiability , 2009 .

[35]  Leslie Pérez Cáceres,et al.  The irace package: Iterated racing for automatic algorithm configuration , 2016 .

[36]  Mutsunori Banbara,et al.  Compiling finite linear CSP into SAT , 2006, Constraints.

[37]  Tomi Janhunen,et al.  Technical Communications of the 26th International Conference on Logic Programming , 2010 .

[38]  Michela Milano,et al.  Learning Techniques for Automatic Algorithm Portfolio Selection , 2004, ECAI.

[39]  Bart Selman,et al.  Algorithm portfolios , 2001, Artif. Intell..

[40]  Thomas Stützle,et al.  Automatic Algorithm Configuration Based on Local Search , 2007, AAAI.