There is, I think, something ethereal about i —the square root of minus one. I remember first hearing about it at school. It seemed an odd beast at that time—an intruder hovering on the edge of reality.

Usually familiarity dulls this sense of the bizarre, but in the case of i it was the reverse: over the years the sense of its surreal nature intensified. It seemed that it was impossible to write mathematics that described the real world in …

I and i

ing WS1S Systems to Verify Parameterized Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Kai Baukus, Saddek Bensalem, Yassine Lakhnech and Karsten Stahl FMona: A Tool for Expressing Validation Techniques over Infinite State Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 J.-P. Bodeveix and M. Filali Transitive Closures of Regular Relations for Verifying Infinite-State Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 Bengt Jonsson and Marcus Nilsson Diagnostic and Test Generation Using Static Analysis to Improve Automatic Test Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 Marius Bozga, Jean-Claude Fernandez and Lucian Ghirvu Efficient Diagnostic Generation for Boolean Equation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 Radu Mateescu Efficient Model-Checking Compositional State Space Generation with Partial Order Reductions for Asynchronous Communicating Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 Jean-Pierre Krimm and Laurent Mounier Checking for CFFD-Preorder with Tester Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 Juhana Helovuo and Antti Valmari Fair Bisimulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 Thomas A. Henzinger and Sriram K. Rajamani Integrating Low Level Symmetries into Reachability Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 Karsten Schmidt Model-Checking Tools Model Checking Support for the ASM High-Level Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331 Giuseppe Del Castillo and Kirsten Winter Table of

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Proc. TACAS 2009

Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) is a new discipline which investigates the inductive construction of first-order clausal theories from examples and background knowledge. We survey the most important theories and methods of this new field. First, various problem specifications of ILP are formalized in semantic settings for ILP, yielding a “model-theory” for ILP. Second, a generic ILP algorithm is presented. Third, the inference rules and corresponding operators used in ILP are presented, resulting in a “proof-theory” for ILP. Fourth, since inductive inference does not produce statements which are assured to follow from what is given, inductive inferences require an alternative form of justification. This can take the form of either probabilistic support or logical constraints on the hypothesis language. Information compression techniques used within ILP are presented within a unifying Bayesian approach to confirmation and corroboration of hypotheses. Also, different ways to constrain the hypothesis language or specify the declarative bias are presented. Fifth, some advanced topics in ILP are addressed. These include aspects of computational learning theory as applied to ILP, and the issue of predicate invention. Finally, we survey some applications and implementations of ILP. ILP applications fall under two different categories: first, scientific discovery and knowledge acquisition, and second, programming assistants.

Inductive Logic Programming : Theory and Methods

Constraint programming is a powerful paradigm for solving combinatorial search problems that draws on a wide range of techniques from artificial intelligence, computer science, databases, programming languages, and operations research. Constraint programming is currently applied with success to many domains, such as scheduling, planning, vehicle routing, configuration, networks, and bioinformatics.

The aim of this handbook is to capture the full breadth and depth of the constraint programming field and to be encyclopedic in its scope and coverage. While there are several excellent books on constraint programming, such books necessarily focus on the main notions and techniques and cannot cover also extensions, applications, and languages. The handbook gives a reasonably complete coverage of all these lines of work, based on constraint programming, so that a reader can have a rather precise idea of the whole field and its potential. Of course each line of work is dealt with in a survey-like style, where some details may be neglected in favor of coverage. However, the extensive bibliography of each chapter will help the interested readers to find suitable sources for the missing details. Each chapter of the handbook is intended to be a self-contained survey of a topic, and is written by one or more authors who are leading researchers in the area.

The intended audience of the handbook is researchers, graduate students, higher-year undergraduates and practitioners who wish to learn about the state-of-the-art in constraint programming. No prior knowledge about the field is necessary to be able to read the chapters and gather useful knowledge. Researchers from other fields should find in this handbook an effective way to learn about constraint programming and to possibly use some of the constraint programming concepts and techniques in their work, thus providing a means for a fruitful cross-fertilization among different research areas.

The handbook is organized in two parts. The first part covers the basic foundations of constraint programming, including the history, the notion of constraint propagation, basic search methods, global constraints, tractability and computational complexity, and important issues in modeling a problem as a constraint problem. The second part covers constraint languages and solver, several useful extensions to the basic framework (such as interval constraints, structured domains, and distributed CSPs), and successful application areas for constraint programming.

- Covers the whole field of constraint programming
- Survey-style chapters
- Five chapters on applications

Table of Contents

Foreword (Ugo Montanari) 
Part I : Foundations
Chapter 1. Introduction (Francesca Rossi, Peter van Beek, Toby Walsh) 
Chapter 2. Constraint Satisfaction: An Emerging Paradigm (Eugene C. Freuder, Alan K. Mackworth) 
Chapter 3. Constraint Propagation (Christian Bessiere) 
Chapter 4. Backtracking Search Algorithms (Peter van Beek) 
Chapter 5. Local Search Methods (Holger H. Hoos, Edward Tsang) 
Chapter 6. Global Constraints (Willem-Jan van Hoeve, Irit Katriel)
Chapter 7. Tractable Structures for CSPs (Rina Dechter)
Chapter 8. The Complexity of Constraint Languages
(David Cohen, Peter Jeavons) 
Chapter 9. Soft Constraints (Pedro Meseguer, Francesca Rossi, Thomas Schiex) 
Chapter 10. Symmetry in Constraint Programming
(Ian P. Gent, Karen E. Petrie, Jean-Francois Puget)
Chapter 11. Modelling (Barbara M. Smith) 
Part II : Extensions, Languages, and Applications

Chapter 12. Constraint Logic Programming (Kim Marriott, Peter J. Stuckey, Mark Wallace) 
Chapter 13. Constraints in Procedural and Concurrent Languages (Thom Fruehwirth, Laurent Michel, Christian Schulte)
Chapter 14. Finite Domain Constraint Programming Systems (Christian Schulte, Mats Carlsson) 
Chapter 15. Operations Research Methods in Constraint Programming (John Hooker) 
Chapter 16. Continuous and Interval Constraints(Frederic Benhamou, Laurent Granvilliers) 
Chapter 17. Constraints over Structured Domains
(Carmen Gervet) 
Chapter 18. Randomness and Structure (Carla Gomes, Toby Walsh)
Chapter 19. Temporal CSPs (Manolis Koubarakis)
Chapter 20. Distributed Constraint Programming
(Boi Faltings) 
Chapter 21. Uncertainty and Change (Kenneth N. Brown, Ian Miguel)
Chapter 22. Constraint-Based Scheduling and Planning
(Philippe Baptiste, Philippe Laborie, Claude Le Pape, Wim Nuijten)
Chapter 23. Vehicle Routing (Philip Kilby, Paul Shaw) 
Chapter 24. Configuration (Ulrich Junker)
Chapter 25. Constraint Applications in Networks
(Helmut Simonis)
Chapter 26. Bioinformatics and Constraints (Rolf Backofen, David Gilbert)

/pdf/handbook-of-constraint-programming-53srutguo2.pdf

Handbook of Constraint Programming

Knowledge Representation, which lies at the core of Artificial Intelligence, is concerned with encoding knowledge on computers to enable systems to reason automatically. The Handbook of Knowledge Representation is an up-to-date review of twenty-five key topics in knowledge representation, written by the leaders of each field.This book is an essential resource for students, researchers and practitioners in all areas of Artificial Intelligence. * Make your computer smarter* Handle qualitative and uncertain information* Improve computational tractability to solve your problems easily

Handbook of Knowledge Representation

We identify an important class of symmetries in constraint programming, arising from matrices of decision variables where rows and columns can be swapped. Whilst lexicographically ordering the rows (columns) breaks all the row (column) symmetries, lexicographically ordering both the rows and the columns fails to break all the compositions of the row and column symmetries. Nevertheless, our experimental results show that this is effective at dealing with these compositions of symmetries. We extend these results to cope with symmetries in any number of dimensions, with partial symmetries, and with symmetric values. Finally, we identify special cases where all compositions of the row and column symmetries can be eliminated by the addition of only a linear number of symmetry-breaking constraints.

Breaking row and column symmetries in matrix models

https://www.it.uu.se/research/group/astra/pub/STAIRS02.pdf

Breaking Row and Column Symmetries in Matrix Models

Using constraint programming, we effectively model
 and efficiently solve the problem of balancing and minimising the traffic complexities of an airspace of adjacent sectors. The traffic complexity of a sector is here defined in terms of the numbers of flights within it, near its border, and on non-level segments within it. The allowed forms of complexity resolution are the changing of the take-off times of not yet airborne flights, the changing of the remaining approach times into the chosen airspace of already airborne flights by slowing down and speeding up within the two layers of feeder sectors around that airspace, as well as the changing of the levels of passage over way-points in that airspace. Experiments with actual European flight profiles obtained from the Central Flow Management Unit (CFMU) show that these forms of complexity resolution can lead to significant complexity reductions and rebalancing.

https://www.it.uu.se/research/group/astra/publications/ATM07.pdf

Air-traffic complexity resolution in multi-sector planning using constraint programming

Current-generation constraint programming languages are considered by many, especially in industry, to be too low-level, difficult, and large. We argue that solver-independent, high-level relational constraint modelling leads to a simpler and smaller language, to more concise, intuitive, and analysable models, as well as to more efficient and effective model formulation, maintenance, reformulation, and verification. All this can be achieved without sacrificing the possibility of efficient solving, so that even time-pressed or less competent modellers can be well assisted. Towards this, we propose the esra relational constraint modelling language, showcase its elegance on some well-known problems, and outline a compilation philosophy for such languages.

Introducing ESRA, a relational language for modelling combinatorial problems

This article presents an arc-consistency algorithm for the tree constraint, which enforces the partitioning of a digraph $\mathcal{G}$ = ($\mathcal{V},\mathcal{E}$) into a set of vertex-disjoint anti-arborescences. It provides a necessary and sufficient condition for checking the tree constraint in $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{V}| + |\mathcal{E}|)$ time, as well as a complete filtering algorithm taking $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{V}| \cdot |\mathcal{E}|)$ time.

https://www.it.uu.se/research/group/astra/publications/CPAIOR05t.pdf

Pierre Flener

Papers

Breaking row and column symmetries in matrix models

Breaking Row and Column Symmetries in Matrix Models

Air-traffic complexity resolution in multi-sector planning using constraint programming

Introducing ESRA, a relational language for modelling combinatorial problems

The tree constraint