Symmetry as a Prelude to Implied Constraints Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel, Toby Walsh University of York.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Non-Binary Constraint Satisfaction Toby Walsh Cork Constraint Computation Center.
Advertisements

Completeness and Expressiveness
Modelling a Steel Mill Slab Design Problem Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel, Toby Walsh AI Group University of York.
Global Constraints Toby Walsh National ICT Australia and University of New South Wales
Global Constraints Toby Walsh NICTA and University of New South Wales
10 October 2006 Foundations of Logic and Constraint Programming 1 Unification ­An overview Need for Unification Ranked alfabeths and terms. Substitutions.
Exploiting Symmetry in Planning Maria Fox Durham Planning Group University of Durham, UK.
Iterative Deepening A* & Constraint Satisfaction Problems Lecture Module 6.
Artificial Intelligence Constraint satisfaction problems Fall 2008 professor: Luigi Ceccaroni.
Reducing Symmetry in Matrix Models Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel, Toby Walsh (York) Pierre Flener, Brahim Hnich, Zeynep Kiziltan, Justin Pearson (Uppsala)
Case study 5: balanced academic curriculum problem Joint work with Brahim Hnich and Zeynep Kiziltan (CPAIOR 2002)
CPSC 422, Lecture 21Slide 1 Intelligent Systems (AI-2) Computer Science cpsc422, Lecture 21 Mar, 4, 2015 Slide credit: some slides adapted from Stuart.
Generating Implied Constraints via Proof Planning Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel, Toby Walsh Dept of CS University of York EPSRC funded project GR/N16129.
Review: Constraint Satisfaction Problems How is a CSP defined? How do we solve CSPs?
Prepared by Doron Shahar
ISBN Chapter 3 Describing Syntax and Semantics.
Expert System Human expert level performance Limited application area Large component of task specific knowledge Knowledge based system Task specific knowledge.
Partial Implications, etc.
Transforming and Refining Abstract Constraint Specifications Alan Frisch, Brahim Hnich*, Ian Miguel, Barbara Smith, and Toby Walsh *Cork Constraint Computation.
CMPT 354, Simon Fraser University, Fall 2008, Martin Ester 52 Database Systems I Relational Algebra.
ECE 331 – Digital System Design State Reduction and State Assignment (Lecture #22) The slides included herein were taken from the materials accompanying.
Constraint Logic Programming Ryan Kinworthy. Overview Introduction Logic Programming LP as a constraint programming language Constraint Logic Programming.
6/11/2015A Fault-Independent etc…1 A Fault-Independent Transitive Closure Algorithm for Redundancy Identification Vishal J. Mehta Kunal K. Dave Vishwani.
Alan M. Frisch Artificial Intelligence Group Department of Computer Science University of York Extending the Reach of Constraint Technology through Reformulation.
CGRASS A System for Transforming Constraint Satisfaction Problems Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel AI Group University of York Toby Walsh 4C.
Inference and Resolution for Problem Solving
Catriel Beeri Pls/Winter 2004/5 type reconstruction 1 Type Reconstruction & Parametric Polymorphism  Introduction  Unification and type reconstruction.
Axiomatic Semantics Dr. M Al-Mulhem ICS
Matrix Modelling Alan M. Frisch and Ian Miguel (York) Brahim Hnich, Zeynep Kiziltan (Uppsala) Toby Walsh (Cork)
Matrix Modelling Pierre Flener (Uppsala) Alan M. Frisch (York) Brahim Hnich, Zeynep Kiziltan (Uppsala) Ian Miguel, and Toby Walsh (York)
Methods of Proof Chapter 7, second half.
1 CMSC424, Spring 2005 CMSC424: Database Design Lecture 9.
Dr. Muhammed Al-Mulhem 1ICS ICS 535 Design and Implementation of Programming Languages Part 1 Fundamentals (Chapter 4) Axiomatic Semantics ICS 535.
Reducing Symmetry in Matrix Models Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel, Toby Walsh (York) Pierre Flener, Brahim Hnich, Zeynep Kiziltan, Justin Pearson (Uppsala)
Alan M. Frisch Artificial Intelligence Group Department of Computer Science University of York Co-authors Ian Miguel, Toby Walsh, Pierre Flener, Brahim.
CGRASS A System for Transforming Constraint Satisfaction Problems Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel (York) Toby Walsh (Cork)
Describing Syntax and Semantics
CGRASS A System for Transforming Constraint Satisfaction Problems Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel AI Group University of York Toby Walsh 4C.
Matrix Modelling: Déjà Vu Pierre Flener (Uppsala) Alan M. Frisch (York) Brahim Hnich, Zeynep Kiziltan (Uppsala) Ian Miguel, and Toby Walsh (York)
Global Constraints for Lexicographic Orderings Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel (University of York) Brahim Hnich, Toby Walsh (4C) Zeynep Kiziltan (Uppsala University)
Modelling a Steel Mill Slab Design Problem Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel, Toby Walsh AI Group University of York.
1. 2 Overview of the Previous Lecture Gap-QS[O(n), ,2|  | -1 ] Gap-QS[O(1), ,2|  | -1 ] QS[O(1),  ] Solvability[O(1),  ] 3-SAT This will imply a.
CP Summer School Modelling for Constraint Programming Barbara Smith 1.Definitions, Viewpoints, Constraints 2.Implied Constraints, Optimization,
Symmetry Breaking Ordering Constraints Zeynep Kiziltan Department of Information Science Uppsala University, Sweden A progress.
Model-Based Specification CIS 376 Bruce R. Maxim UM-Dearborn.
Chapter 4.1 Solving Systems of Linear Equations in two variables.
Chapter 3. Pitfalls Initialization Ambiguity in an iteration
1 Inference Rules and Proofs (Z); Program Specification and Verification Inference Rules and Proofs (Z); Program Specification and Verification.
1 Chapter 8 Inference and Resolution for Problem Solving.
Modelling for Constraint Programming Barbara Smith CP 2010 Doctoral Programme.
Constraint Satisfaction Basics strongly influenced by Rina Dechter, “Constraint Processing”, 2003.
CP Summer School Modelling for Constraint Programming Barbara Smith 2. Implied Constraints, Optimization, Dominance Rules.
Daniel Kroening and Ofer Strichman 1 Decision Procedures An Algorithmic Point of View BDDs.
CSCI 5582 Fall 2006 CSCI 5582 Artificial Intelligence Fall 2006 Jim Martin.
Linear Equations in Two Variables A Linear Equation in Two Variables is any equation that can be written in the form where A and B are not both zero.
Overview Concept Learning Representation Inductive Learning Hypothesis
Propositional Calculus CS 270: Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science Jeremy Johnson.
CPSC 422, Lecture 21Slide 1 Intelligent Systems (AI-2) Computer Science cpsc422, Lecture 21 Oct, 30, 2015 Slide credit: some slides adapted from Stuart.
CP Summer School Modelling for Constraint Programming Barbara Smith 3. Symmetry, Viewpoints.
Maximum Density Still Life Symmetries and Lazy Clause Generation Geoffrey Chu, Maria Garcia de la Banda, Chris Mears, Peter J. Stuckey.
Intro to Planning Or, how to represent the planning problem in logic.
Model 5 Long Distance Phone Calls By Benjamin Cutting
Solving Systems of Equations by Elimination. Standard and Objective A.REI.5 Prove that, given a system of two equations in two variables, replacing one.
C HAPTER 3 Describing Syntax and Semantics. D YNAMIC S EMANTICS Describing syntax is relatively simple There is no single widely acceptable notation or.
Chapter 3 Systems of Equations. Solving Systems of Linear Equations by Graphing.
SLIDES FOR CHAPTER 15 REDUCTION OF STATE TABLES STATE ASSIGNMENT
Perturbation method, lexicographic method
Propositional Calculus: Boolean Algebra and Simplification
Resolution Proofs for Combinational Equivalence
Generic SBDD using Computational Group Theory
Presentation transcript:

Symmetry as a Prelude to Implied Constraints Alan Frisch, Ian Miguel, Toby Walsh University of York

Overview Motivation Example: The Fractions Puzzle Proof Planning Example: The Steel Mill Conclusions

Why Do We Care About Symmetry? Important for generating implied constraints: –Some ICs can only be generated as a result of breaking symmetry first. Symmetry-breaking a powerful means of reducing search in its own right.

The Fractions Puzzle Find 9 distinct non-zero digits, A to I, satisfying: Note: BC is short for 10B + C. Before we break symmetry, we can say very little about this.

The Fractions Puzzle (2) The problem contains 3 symmetrical terms. Break symmetry with ordering constraints:

Given: Elimination Eliminate then in favour of. Giving: Then:

Similarly: Elimination(2) and are both ternary. Original constraint has arity 9. We can go further to get unary constraints such as: G  4

Proof Planning Used to guide search for proof in ATP. Patterns in proofs are encapsulated in methods. –Strong preconditions limit applicability. –Prevent combinatorially explosive search.

Proof Planning (2) Given a goal to prove: –Select a method. –Check pre-conditions. –Execute post-conditions. –Construct output goal(s). Associated tactic constructs actual proof.

Proof Planning for Implied Constraints Easily adaptable to generating logical consequences. Methods encapsulate common patterns in hand-generating implied constraints. Forward chaining rather than goal-directed.

Symmetry Method Identify variables/terms which are indistinguishable –Swap variable(s) and compare normalised set of equations. Order indistinguishable variables/terms. –If x, y indistinguishable, impose x  y. Then use other methods to infer implied constraints.

Normalisation Lexicographic order on variable names. Constants ordered before variables. Non-atomic subterms compared based on the least variable in each. Becomes:

Identifying symmetries is potentially expensive. Heuristics based on structural equivalence. –Identical when explicit variable names replaced by a common `marker’. Becomes: Swap corresponding pairs throughout and test for indistinguishability. Symmetry Method (2)

The Slab Design Problem The mill can make  different slab sizes. Given d input orders with: –A colour (route through the mill). –A weight. Pack orders onto slabs, minimising total slab capacity. Constraints: –Capacity: Total weight of orders assigned to a slab cannot exceed slab capacity. –Colour: Each slab can contain at most p of k total colours.

An Example Slab Sizes: {1, 3, 4} (  = 3) Orders: {o a, …, o i } (d = 9) Colours: {red, green, blue, orange, brown} (k = 5) p = 2 abcdefghi Solution:

A Redundant Variable Model Number of slabs is not fixed. –Assume highest order weight does not exceed maximum slab size. Slab variables: {s 1, …, s d }. –Value is size of slab. Solution quality:

Slab Variable Symmetry Slab variables are indistinguishable. –Counteract with binary symmetry-breaking constraints: s 1  s 2, s 2  s 3, etc. Existing symmetry method can cope with this. Leads to new implied constraints, e.g. s 1  max(orderWeights)

Order Assignment oaoa obob ococ odod s1s s2s s3s s4s Rows where slab variables assigned same size are indistinguishable. When s i = s i+1 : Corresponding rows of order A are lexicographically ordered. E.g  0110.

A New Symmetry Method? Breaking this type of symmetry is currently beyond our proof planner. Improvements: –Recognise that symmetries can occur based on partial assignments. –Add symmetry-breaking constraints as implications with partial assignments as preconditions.

A New Symmetry Method(2) LHS of: are symmetrical if s 1 = s 2. So: s 1 = s 2  order A [i, 1]  lex order A [i, 2] (since the weight(o i ) are constant).

Conclusions Symmetry-breaking is an important first step in generating implied constraints. We can already detect and break some symmetry within the proof planner. Next step is to try and remove (simple) symmetries that might appear during search.