Indistinguishable objects often occur when modelling problems in constraint programming, as well as in other related paradigms. They occur when objects can be viewed as being drawn from a set of unlabelled objects, and the only operation allowed on them is equality testing. For example, the golfers in the social golfer problem are indistinguishable. If we do label the golfers, then any relabelling of the golfers in one solution gives another valid solution. Therefore, we can regard the symmetric group of size $n$ as acting on a set of $n$ indistinguishable objects. In this paper, we show how we can break the symmetries resulting from indistinguishable objects. We show how symmetries on indistinguishable objects can be defined properly in complex types, for example in a matrix indexed by indistinguishable objects. We then show how the resulting symmetries can be broken correctly. In Essence, a high-level modelling language, indistinguishable objects are encapsulated in "unnamed types". We provide an implementation of complete symmetry breaking for unnamed types in Essence.

Diverse planning is the problem of generating plans with distinct characteristics. This is valuable for many real-world scenarios, including applications related to plan recognition and business process automation. In this work, we introduce \emph{Behaviour Planning}, a diverse planning toolkit that can characterise and generate diverse plans based on modular diversity models. We present a qualitative framework for describing diversity models, a planning approach for generating plans aligned with any given diversity model, and provide a practical implementation of an SMT-based behaviour planner. We showcase how the qualitative approach offered by Behaviour Planning allows it to overcome various challenges faced by previous approaches. Finally, the experimental evaluation shows the effectiveness of Behaviour Planning in generating diverse plans compared to state-of-the-art approaches.

We report on progress in modelling and solving Puzznic, a video game requiring the player to plan sequences of moves to clear a grid by matching blocks. We focus here on levels with no moving blocks. We compare a planning approach and three constraint programming approaches on a small set of benchmark instances. The planning approach is at present superior to the constraint programming approaches, but we outline proposals for improving the constraint models.

Diverse planning is the problem of finding multiple plans for a given problem specification, which is at the core of many real-world applications. For example, diverse planning is a critical piece for the efficiency of plan recognition systems when dealing with noisy and missing observations. Providing diverse solutions can also benefit situations where constraints are too expensive or impossible to model. Current diverse planners operate by generating multiple plans and then applying a selection procedure to extract diverse solutions using a similarity metric. Generally, current similarity metrics only consider the structural properties of the given plans. We argue that this approach is a limitation that sometimes prevents such metrics from capturing why two plans differ. In this work, we propose two new domain-independent metrics which are able to capture relevant information on the difference between two given plans from a domain-dependent viewpoint. We showcase their utility in various situations where the currently used metrics fail to capture the similarity between plans, failing to capture some structural symmetries.

The Essence language allows a user to specify a constraint problem at a level of abstraction above that at which constraint modelling decisions are made. Essence specifications are refined into constraint models using the Conjure automated modelling tool, which employs a suite of refinement rules. However, Essence is a rich language in which there are many equivalent ways to specify a given problem. A user may therefore omit the use of domain attributes or abstract types, resulting in fewer refinement rules being applicable and therefore a reduced set of output models from which to select. This paper addresses the problem of recovering this information automatically to increase the robustness of the quality of the output constraint models in the face of variation in the input Essence specification. We present reformulation rules that can change the type of a decision variable or add attributes that shrink its domain. We demonstrate the efficacy of this approach in terms of the quantity and quality of models Conjure can produce from the transformed specification compared with the original.

Pen and paper puzzles like Sudoku, Futoshiki and Skyscrapers are hugely popular. Solving such puzzles can be a trivial task for modern AI systems. However, most AI systems solve problems using a form of backtracking, while people try to avoid backtracking as much as possible. This means that existing AI systems do not output explanations about their reasoning that are meaningful to people. We present Demystify, a tool which allows puzzles to be expressed in a high-level constraint programming language and uses MUSes to allow us to produce descriptions of steps in the puzzle solving. We give several improvements to the existing techniques for solving puzzles with MUSes, which allow us to solve a range of significantly more complex puzzles and give higher quality explanations. We demonstrate the effectiveness and generality of Demystify by comparing its results to documented strategies for solving a range of pen and paper puzzles by hand, showing that our technique can find many of the same explanations.

The most famous single-player card game is 'Klondike', but our ignorance of its winnability percentage has been called "one of the embarrassments of applied mathematics". Klondike is just one of many single-player card games, generically called 'patience' or 'solitaire' games, for which players have long wanted to know how likely a particular game is to be winnable for a random deal. A number of different games have been studied empirically in the academic literature and by non-academic enthusiasts. Here we show that a single general purpose Artificial Intelligence program, called "Solvitaire", can be used to determine the winnability percentage of approximately 30 different single-player card games with a 95\% confidence interval of +/- 0.1\% or better. For example, we report the winnability of Klondike as 81.956% +/- 0.096% (in the 'thoughtful' variant where the player knows the location of all cards), a 30-fold reduction in confidence interval over the best previous result. Almost all our results are either entirely new or represent significant improvements on previous knowledge.

The n-Queens problem is to place n chess queens on an n by n chessboard so that no two queens are on the same row, column or diagonal. The n-Queens Completion problem is a variant, dating to 1850, in which some queens are already placed and the solver is asked to place the rest, if possible. We show that n-Queens Completion is both NP-Complete and #P-Complete. A corollary is that any non-attacking arrangement of queens can be included as a part of a solution to a larger n-Queens problem. We introduce generators of random instances for n-Queens Completion and the closely related Blocked n-Queens and Excluded Diagonals Problem. We describe three solvers for these problems, and empirically analyse the hardness of randomly generated instances. For Blocked n-Queens and the Excluded Diagonals Problem, we show the existence of a phase transition associated with hard instances as has been seen in other NP-Complete problems, but a natural generator for n-Queens Completion did not generate consistently hard instances. The significance of this work is that the n-Queens problem has been very widely used as a benchmark in Artificial Intelligence, but conclusions on it are often disputable because of the simple complexity of the decision problem. Our results give alternative benchmarks which are hard theoretically and empirically, but for which solving techniques designed for n-Queens need minimal or no change.

Qualitative modelling is a technique integrating the fields of theoretical computer science, artificial intelligence and the physical and biological sciences. The aim is to be able to model the behaviour of systems without estimating parameter values and fixing the exact quantitative dynamics. Traditional applications are the study of the dynamics of physical and biological systems at a higher level of abstraction than that obtained by estimation of numerical parameter values for a fixed quantitative model. Qualitative modelling has been studied and implemented to varying degrees of sophistication in Petri nets, process calculi and constraint programming. In this paper we reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of existing frameworks, we demonstrate how recent advances in constraint programming can be leveraged to produce high quality qualitative models, and we describe the advances in theory and technology that would be needed to make constraint programming the best option for scientific investigation in the broadest sense.

Designing component-based constraint solvers is a complex problem. Some components are required, some are optional and there are interdependencies between the components. Because of this, previous approaches to solver design and modification have been ad-hoc and limited. We present a system that transforms a description of the components and the characteristics of the target constraint solver into a constraint problem. Solving this problem yields the description of a valid solver. Our approach represents a significant step towards the automated design and synthesis of constraint solvers that are specialised for individual constraint problem classes or instances.