Many AI synthesis problems such as planning or scheduling may be modelized as constraint satisfaction problems (CSP). A CSP is typically defined as the problem of finding any consistent labeling for a fixed set of variables satisfying all given constraints between these variables. However, for many real tasks such as job-shop scheduling, time-table scheduling, design?, all these constraints have not the same significance and have not to be necessarily satisfied. A first distinction can be made between hard constraints, which every solution should satisfy and soft constraints, whose satisfaction has not to be certain. In this paper, we formalize the notion of possibilistic constraint satisfaction problems that allows the modeling of uncertainly satisfied constraints. We use a possibility distribution over labelings to represent respective possibilities of each labeling. Necessity-valued constraints allow a simple expression of the respective certainty degrees of each constraint. The main advantage of our approach is its integration in the CSP technical framework. Most classical techniques, such as Backtracking (BT), arcconsistency enforcing (AC) or Forward Checking have been extended to handle possibilistics CSP and are effectively implemented. The utility of our approach is demonstrated on a simple design problem.

We consider the problem of creating fair course timetables in the setting of a university. Our motivation is to improve the overall satisfaction of individuals concerned (students, teachers, etc.) by providing a fair timetable to them. The central idea is that undesirable arrangements in the course timetable, i.e., violations of soft constraints, should be distributed in a fair way among the individuals. We propose two formulations for the fair course timetabling problem that are based on max-min fairness and Jain's fairness index, respectively. Furthermore, we present and experimentally evaluate an optimization algorithm based on simulated annealing for solving max-min fair course timetabling problems. The new contribution is concerned with measuring the energy difference between two timetables, i.e., how much worse a timetable is compared to another timetable with respect to max-min fairness. We introduce three different energy difference measures and evaluate their impact on the overall algorithm performance. The second proposed problem formulation focuses on the tradeoff between fairness and the total amount of soft constraint violations. Our experimental evaluation shows that the known best solutions to the ITC2007 curriculum-based course timetabling instances are quite fair with respect to Jain's fairness index. However, the experiments also show that the fairness can be improved further for only a rather small increase in the total amount of soft constraint violations.

In this paper we propose a family of algorithms combining tree-clustering with conditioning that trade space for time. Such algorithms are useful for reasoning in probabilistic and deterministic networks as well as for accomplishing optimization tasks. By analyzing the problem structure it will be possible to select from a spectrum the algorithm that best meets a given time-space specification.

This paper draws on diverse areas of computer science to develop a unified view of computation: (1) Optimization in operations research, where a numerical objective function is maximized under constraints, is generalized from the numerical total order to a non-numerical partial order that can be interpreted in terms of information. (2) Relations are generalized so that there are relations of which the constituent tuples have numerical indexes, whereas in other relations these indexes are variables. The distinction is essential in our definition of constraint satisfaction problems. (3) Constraint satisfaction problems are formulated in terms of semantics of conjunctions of atomic formulas of predicate logic. (4) Approximation structures, which are available for several important domains, are applied to solutions of constraint satisfaction problems. As application we treat constraint satisfaction problems over reals. These cover a large part of numerical analysis, most significantly nonlinear equations and inequalities. The chaotic algorithm analyzed in the paper combines the efficiency of floating-point computation with the correctness guarantees of arising from our logico-mathematical model of constraint-satisfaction problems.

This paper investigates the problem of finding a preference relation on a set of acts from the knowledge of an ordering on events (subsets of states of the world) describing the decision-maker (DM)s uncertainty and an ordering of consequences of acts, describing the DMs preferences. However, contrary to classical approaches to decision theory, we try to do it without resorting to any numerical representation of utility nor uncertainty, and without even using any qualitative scale on which both uncertainty and preference could be mapped. It is shown that although many axioms of Savage theory can be preserved and despite the intuitive appeal of the method for constructing a preference over acts, the approach is inconsistent with a probabilistic representation of uncertainty, but leads to the kind of uncertainty theory encountered in non-monotonic reasoning (especially preferential and rational inference), closely related to possibility theory. Moreover the method turns out to be either very little decisive or to lead to very risky decisions, although its basic principles look sound. This paper raises the question of the very possibility of purely symbolic approaches to Savage-like decision-making under uncertainty and obtains preliminary negative results.

Stochastic algorithms are among the best for solving computationally hard search and reasoning problems. The runtime of such procedures is characterized by a random variable. Different algorithms give rise to different probability distributions. One can take advantage of such differences by combining several algorithms into a portfolio, and running them in parallel or interleaving them on a single processor. We provide a detailed evaluation of the portfolio approach on distributions of hard combinatorial search problems. We show under what conditions the protfolio approach can have a dramatic computational advantage over the best traditional methods.

We previously designed Partial Order Conflict Driven Clause Learning (PO-CDCL), a variation of the satisfiability solving CDCL algorithm with a partial order on decision levels, and showed that it can speed up the solving on problems with a high independence between decision levels. In this paper, we more thoroughly analyze the reasons of the efficiency of PO-CDCL. Of particular importance is that the partial order introduces several candidates for the assertion level. By evaluating different heuristics for this choice, we show that the assertion level selection has an important impact on solving and that a carefully designed heuristic can significantly improve performances on relevant benchmarks.

In the real world, insufficient information, limited computation resources, and complex problem structures often force an autonomous agent to make a decision in time less than that required to solve the problem at hand completely. Flexible and approximate computations are two approaches to decision making under limited computation resources. Flexible computation helps an agent to flexibly allocate limited computation resources so that the overall system utility is maximized. Approximate computation enables an agent to find the best satisfactory solution within a deadline. In this paper, we present two state-space reduction methods for flexible and approximate computation: quantitative reduction to deal with inaccurate heuristic information, and structural reduction to handle complex problem structures. These two methods can be applied successively to continuously improve solution quality if more computation is available. Our results show that these reduction methods are effective and efficient, finding better solutions with less computation than some existing well-known methods.

We introduce two hierarchies of clause-sets, SLUR_k and UC_k, based on the classes SLUR (Single Lookahead Unit Refutation), introduced in 1995, and UC (Unit refutation Complete), introduced in 1994. The class SLUR, introduced in [Annexstein et al, 1995], is the class of clause-sets for which unit-clause-propagation (denoted by r_1) detects unsatisfiability, or where otherwise iterative assignment, avoiding obviously false assignments by look-ahead, always yields a satisfying assignment. It is natural to consider how to form a hierarchy based on SLUR. Such investigations were started in [Cepek et al, 2012] and [Balyo et al, 2012]. We present what we consider the "limit hierarchy" SLUR_k, based on generalising r_1 by r_k, that is, using generalised unit-clause-propagation introduced in [Kullmann, 1999, 2004]. The class UC, studied in [Del Val, 1994], is the class of Unit refutation Complete clause-sets, that is, those clause-sets for which unsatisfiability is decidable by r_1 under any falsifying assignment. For unsatisfiable clause-sets F, the minimum k such that r_k determines unsatisfiability of F is exactly the "hardness" of F, as introduced in [Ku 99, 04]. For satisfiable F we use now an extension mentioned in [Ansotegui et al, 2008]: The hardness is the minimum k such that after application of any falsifying partial assignments, r_k determines unsatisfiability. The class UC_k is given by the clause-sets which have hardness <= k. We observe that UC_1 is exactly UC. UC_k has a proof-theoretic character, due to the relations between hardness and tree-resolution, while SLUR_k has an algorithmic character. The correspondence between r_k and k-times nested input resolution (or tree resolution using clause-space k+1) means that r_k has a dual nature: both algorithmic and proof theoretic. This corresponds to a basic result of this paper, namely SLUR_k = UC_k.

ConArg is a Constraint Programming-based tool that can be used to model and solve different problems related to Abstract Argumentation Frameworks (AFs). To implement this tool we have used JaCoP, a Java library that provides the user with a Finite Domain Constraint Programming paradigm. ConArg is able to randomly generate networks with small-world properties in order to find conflict-free, admissible, complete, stable grounded, preferred, semi-stable, stage and ideal extensions on such interaction graphs. We present the main features of ConArg and we report the performance in time, showing also a comparison with ASPARTIX [1], a similar tool using Answer Set Programming. The use of techniques for constraint solving can tackle the complexity of the problems presented in [2]. Moreover we suggest semiring-based soft constraints as a mean to parametrically represent and solve Weighted Argumentation Frameworks: different kinds of preference levels related to attacks, e.g., a score representing a "fuzziness", a "cost" or a probability, can be represented by choosing different instantiation of the semiring algebraic structure. The basic idea is to provide a common computational and quantitative framework.