Solving quantified constraint satisfaction problems with value selection rules

Solving a quantified constraint satisfaction problem (QCSP) is usually a hard task due to its computational complexity. Exact algorithms play an important role in solving this problem, among which backtrack algorithms are effective. In a backtrack algorithm, an important step is assigning a variable by a chosen value when exploiting a branch, and thus a good value selection rule may speed up greatly. In this paper, we propose two value selection rules for existentially and universally quantified variables, respectively, to avoid unnecessary searching. The rule for universally quantified variables is prior to trying failure values in previous branches, and the rule for existentially quantified variables selects the promising values first. Two rules are integrated into the state-of-the-art QCSP solver, i.e., QCSP-Solve, which is an exact solver based on backtracking. We perform a number of experiments to evaluate improvements brought by our rules. From computational results, we can conclude that the new value selection rules speed up the solver by 5 times on average and 30 times at most. We also show both rules perform well particularly on instances with existentially and universally quantified variables occurring alternatively.

[1]  Yannis C. Stamatiou,et al.  Random Constraint Satisfaction a More Accurate Picture , 2022 .

[2]  Wei Li,et al.  Exact Phase Transitions in Random Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 2000, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[3]  Barbara M. Smith,et al.  Trying Harder to Fail First , 1998, ECAI.

[4]  Hilary Putnam,et al.  A Computing Procedure for Quantification Theory , 1960, JACM.

[5]  P. A. Geelen,et al.  Dual Viewpoint Heuristics for Binary Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 1992, ECAI.

[6]  Wei Li,et al.  Many hard examples in exact phase transitions , 2003, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[7]  Peter Nightingale Non-binary quantified CSP: algorithms and modelling , 2009, Constraints.

[8]  Christian Bessiere,et al.  MAC and Combined Heuristics: Two Reasons to Forsake FC (and CBJ?) on Hard Problems , 1996, CP.

[9]  Fahiem Bacchus,et al.  Solution Directed Backjumping for QCSP , 2007, CP.

[10]  Peter Nightingale,et al.  Consistency for Quantified Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 2005, CP.

[11]  Donald W. Loveland,et al.  A machine program for theorem-proving , 2011, CACM.

[12]  Roland H. C. Yap,et al.  An optimal coarse-grained arc consistency algorithm , 2005, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Christian Bessiere,et al.  : A Bottom-Up Approach for Solving Quantified CSPs , 2006, CP.

[14]  Kostas Stergiou,et al.  QCSP-Solve: A Solver for Quantified Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 2005, IJCAI.

[15]  Arnaud Lallouet,et al.  Ultra-weak solutions and consistency enforcement in minimax weighted constraint satisfaction , 2015, Constraints.

[16]  Malik Ghallab,et al.  Chapter 14 – Temporal Planning , 2004 .

[17]  Peter van Beek,et al.  Conflict-Directed Backjumping Revisited , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[18]  Wei Li,et al.  An Average Analysis of Backtracking on Random Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 2004, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[19]  Patrick Prosser,et al.  HYBRID ALGORITHMS FOR THE CONSTRAINT SATISFACTION PROBLEM , 1993, Comput. Intell..

[20]  Christian Bessiere,et al.  Guiding Search in QCSP+ with Back-Propagation , 2008, CP.

[21]  Toby Walsh,et al.  An Empirical Study of Dynamic Variable Ordering Heuristics for the Constraint Satisfaction Problem , 1996, CP.

[22]  Hui Chen,et al.  A literature survey on smart cities , 2015, Science China Information Sciences.

[23]  Marco Benedetti,et al.  Modeling adversary scheduling with QCSP+ , 2008, SAC '08.

[24]  Kostas Stergiou,et al.  Preprocessing Quantified Constraint Satisfaction Problems with Value Reordering and Directional Arc and Path Consistency , 2008, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools.

[25]  Yanchun Liang,et al.  Improving degree-based variable ordering heuristics for solving constraint satisfaction problems , 2015, J. Heuristics.

[26]  Minghao Yin,et al.  Experimental analyses on phase transitions in compiling satisfiability problems , 2014, Science China Information Sciences.

[27]  Xiaofang Zhang,et al.  Reasoning and predicting POMDP planning complexity via covering numbers , 2016, Frontiers of Computer Science.

[28]  Zhanshan Li,et al.  A Novel Strategy of Combining Variable Ordering Heuristics for Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 2018, IEEE Access.

[29]  Pierre Marquis,et al.  Consistency restoration and explanations in dynamic CSPs Application to configuration , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[30]  Hans Kleine Büning,et al.  Resolution for Quantified Boolean Formulas , 1995, Inf. Comput..

[31]  Stefan Edelkamp,et al.  Automated Planning: Theory and Practice , 2007, Künstliche Intell..

[32]  Arnaud Lallouet,et al.  Consistencies for Ultra-Weak Solutions in Minimax Weighted CSPs Using the Duality Principle , 2012, CP.

[33]  Haihang You,et al.  Empirical investigation of stochastic local search for maximum satisfiability , 2018, Frontiers of Computer Science.

[34]  Arnaud Lallouet,et al.  Constraint Games revisited , 2017, IJCAI.

[35]  Kenneth N. Brown,et al.  Value ordering for quantified CSPs , 2009, Constraints.

[36]  Kostas Stergiou,et al.  Solving quantified constraint satisfaction problems , 2008, Artif. Intell..