Skip to main content

The constrainedness of Arc consistency

  • Session 5b
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1330))

Abstract

We show that the same methodology used to study phase transition behaviour in NP-complete problems works with a polynomial problem class: establishing arc consistency. A general measure of the constrainedness of an ensemble of problems, used to locate phase transitions in random NP-complete problems, predicts the location of a phase transition in establishing arc consistency. A complexity peak for the AC3 algorithm is associated with this transition. Finite size scaling models both the scaling of this transition and the computational cost. On problems at the phase transition, this model of computational cost agrees with the theoretical worst case. As with NP-complete problems, constrainedness — and proxies for it which are cheaper to compute — can be used as a heuristic for reducing the number of checks needed to establish arc consistency in AC3.

The authors are supported by EPSRC awards GR/L/24014 and GR/K/65706, and the EU award EU20603. The authors wish to thank other members of the APES research group for their help, and Gene Freuder.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Michael N. Barber. Finite-size scaling. In Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, Volume 8, pages 145–266. Academic Press, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  2. C. Bessière. Arc-consistency and arc-consistency again. Artificial Intelligence, 65:179–190, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  3. B. Bollobas. Random Graphs. Academic Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  4. P. Cheeseman, B. Kanefsky, and W.M. Taylor. Where the really hard problems are. In Proceedings of IJCAI-91, pages 331–337, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  5. V. Chvatal and B. Reed. Mick gets some (the odds are on his side). In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 620–627. IEEE, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  6. I.P. Gent, E. MacIntyre, P. Prosser, and T. Walsh. Scaling effects in the CSP phase transition. In Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP-95), pages 70–87. Springer, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  7. I.P. Gent, E. MacIntyre, P. Prosser, and T. Walsh. The constrainedness of search. In Proceedings of AAAI-96, pages 246–252, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. I.P. Gent, E. MacIntyre, P. Prosser, and T. Walsh. The scaling of search cost. In Proceedings of AAAI-97, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  9. I.P. Gent and T. Walsh. Phase transitions and annealed theories: Number partitioning as a case study. In Proceedings of ECAI-96, pages 170–174, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  10. S.A. Grant and B.M. Smith. The arc and path consistency phase transitions. Report 96.09, Research Report Series, School of Computer Studies, University of Leeds, March 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  11. S. Kirkpatrick and B. Selman. Critical behavior in the satisfiability of random boolean expressions. Science, 264:1297–1301, May 27 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  12. A.K. Mackworth. Consistency in networks of relations. Artificial Intelligence, 8:99–118, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  13. A.K. Mackworth and E.C. Freuder. The complexity of some polynomial network consistency algorithms for constraint satisfaction problems. Artificial Intelligence, 25:65–74, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. Mitchell, B. Selman, and H. Levesque. Hard and easy distributions of SAT problems. In Proceedings of AAAI-92, pages 459–465. AAAI Press/The MIT Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. Mohr and T.C. Henderson. Arc and path consistency revisited. Artificial Intelligence, 28:225–233, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  16. B. Nudel. Consistent-labeling problems and their algorithms: Expectedcomplexities and theory-based heuristics. Artificial Intelligence, 21:135–178, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  17. D. Sabin and E.C. Freuder. Contradicting conventional wisdom in constraint satisfaction. In Proceedings of ECAI-94, pages 125–129, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  18. T. Schiex, J-C. Régin, C. Gaspin and G. Verfaille. Lazy Arc Consistency. In Proceedings of AAAI-96, pages 216–221, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  19. B. Selman and S. Kirkpatrick. Critical behavior in the computational cost of satisfiability testing. Artificial Intelligence, 81:273–295, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  20. B.M. Smith and M.E. Dyer. Locating the phase transition in binary constraint satisfaction problems. Artificial Intelligence, 81:155–181, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  21. E.P.K. Tsang. Foundations of Constraint Satisfaction. Academic Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  22. R.J. Wallace. Why AC-3 is almost always better than AC-4 for establishing arc consistency in CSPs. In Proceedings of IJCAI-93, pages 239–245, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  23. R.J. Wallace and E.C. Freuder. Ordering heuristics for arc consistency algorithms. In Proc. Ninth Canada Conf. on AI, pages 163–169, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Gert Smolka

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Gent, I.P., MacIntyre, E., Prosser, P., Shaw, P., Walsh, T. (1997). The constrainedness of Arc consistency. In: Smolka, G. (eds) Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming-CP97. CP 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1330. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0017449

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0017449

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63753-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69642-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics