USING A THEOREM PROVER FOR REASONING ON CONSTRAINT PROBLEMS

Specifications of constraint problems can be considered logical formulae. As a consequence, it is possible to infer their properties by means of automated reasoning tools, with the goal of automatically synthesizing transformations that can make the solving process more efficient. The purpose of this paper is to link two important technologies: automated theorem proving and constraint programming. We report the results on using ATP technology for checking existence of symmetries, checking whether a given formula breaks a symmetry, and checking existence of functional dependencies in a specification. The output of the reasoning phase is a transformed constraint program, consisting in a reformulated specification and, possibly a search strategy. We show our techniques on problems such as Graph coloring, Sailco inventory and Protein folding.

[1]  Gerald Pfeifer,et al.  The KR System dlv: Progress Report, Comparisons and Benchmarks , 1998, KR.

[2]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Twelfth Conference on on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, July 30 - August 3, 2000, Austin, Texas, USA , 2000, AAAI 2000.

[3]  Enrique Francisco Castillo Ron,et al.  Building and solving mathematical programming models in engineering and science , 2002 .

[4]  William McCune,et al.  OTTER 3.0 Reference Manual and Guide , 1994 .

[5]  B. McKay.  nauty User ’ s Guide ( Version 2 . 4 ) , 1990 .

[6]  Mihalis Yannakakis,et al.  On the Complexity of Protein Folding , 1998, J. Comput. Biol..

[7]  Toby Walsh,et al.  CGRASS: A System for Transforming Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 2002, International Workshop on Constraint Solving and Constraint Logic Programming.

[8]  Pascal Van Hentenryck.  The OPL optimization programming language , 1999 .

[9]  Enrique Castillo,et al.  Building and Solving Mathematical Programming Models in Engineering and Science , 2001 .

[10]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Breaking Row and Column Symmetries in Matrix Models , 2002, CP.

[11]  C. Yangt,et al.  Constraint Networks: A Survey , 2004 .

[12]  Toni Mancini,et al.  Automated reformulation of specifications by safe delay of constraints , 2004, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  A Theory of Abstraction , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[14]  K. Dill,et al.  A lattice statistical mechanics model of the conformational and sequence spaces of proteins , 1989 .

[15]  Enrico Giunchiglia,et al.  Applying the Davis-Putnam Procedure to Non-clausal Formulas , 1999, AI*IA.

[16]  William McCune,et al.  MACE 2.0 Reference Manual and Guide , 2001, ArXiv.

[17]  Ilkka Niemelä,et al.  Logic programs with stable model semantics as a constraint programming paradigm , 1999, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[18]  Chu Min Li,et al.  Integrating Equivalency Reasoning into Davis-Putnam Procedure , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[19]  Wolfgang Faber,et al.  The DLV system for knowledge representation and reasoning , 2002, TOCL.

[20]  Gwynedd Pickett.  Vampire , 2006, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[21]  William McCune,et al.  OTTER 3.3 Reference Manual , 2003, ArXiv.

[22]  Phokion G. Kolaitis.  Constraint Satisfaction, Databases, and Logic , 2003, IJCAI.

[23]  Wolfgang Bibel,et al.  Constraint Satisfaction from a Deductive Viewpoint , 1988, Artif. Intell..

[24]  Ronald Fagin.  Generalized first-order spectra, and polynomial. time recognizable sets , 1974 .

[25]  Paul Walton Purdom,et al.  Backtrack Searching in the Presence of Symmetry , 1988, Nord. J. Comput..

[26]  Carme Torras,et al.  Solving Strategies for Highly Symmetric CSPs , 1999, IJCAI.

[27]  James M. Crawford,et al.  Symmetry-Breaking Predicates for Search Problems , 1996, KR.

[28]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Using Auxiliary Variables and Implied Constraints to Model Non-Binary Problems , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[29]  Brian W. Kernighan,et al.  AMPL: A Modeling Language for Mathematical Programming , 1993 .

[30]  Toni Mancini,et al.  Detecting and Breaking Symmetries by Reasoning on Problem Specifications , 2005, SARA.

[31]  Jean-François Puget,et al.  On the Satisfiability of Symmetrical Constrained Satisfaction Problems , 1993, ISMIS.

[32]  Toni Mancini,et al.  Detecting and breaking symmetries on specications , 2003 .

[33]  Bradford D. Allen.  Building and solving mathematical programming models inengineering and science by Enrique Castillo, Antonio J. Conejo,Pablo Pedregal, Ricardo Garcia, and Natalia Alguacil , 2002 .

[34]  Marco Cadoli,et al.  Compiling Problem Specifications into SAT , 2001, ESOP.

[35]  Toni Mancini,et al.  Exploiting functional dependencies in declarative problem specifications , 2004, Artif. Intell..

[36]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .