Lifting symmetry breaking constraints with inductive logic programming
-
Published:2022-04
Issue:4
Volume:111
Page:1303-1326
-
ISSN:0885-6125
-
Container-title:Machine Learning
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Mach Learn
Author:
Tarzariol AliceORCID, Gebser Martin, Schekotihin Konstantin
Abstract
AbstractEfficient omission of symmetric solution candidates is essential for combinatorial problem-solving. Most of the existing approaches are instance-specific and focus on the automatic computation of Symmetry Breaking Constraints (SBCs) for each given problem instance. However, the application of such approaches to large-scale instances or advanced problem encodings might be problematic since the computed SBCs are propositional and, therefore, can neither be meaningfully interpreted nor transferred to other instances. As a result, a time-consuming recomputation of SBCs must be done before every invocation of a solver. To overcome these limitations, we introduce a new model-oriented approach for Answer Set Programming that lifts the SBCs of small problem instances into a set of interpretable first-order constraints using the Inductive Logic Programming paradigm. Experiments demonstrate the ability of our framework to learn general constraints from instance-specific SBCs for a collection of combinatorial problems. The obtained results indicate that our approach significantly outperforms a state-of-the-art instance-specific method as well as the direct application of a solver.
Funder
KWF project 28472 cms electronics GmbH FunderMax GmbH Hirsch Armbänder GmbH incubed IT GmbH Infineon Technologies Austria AG Isovolta AG Kostwein Holding GmbH Privatstiftung Kärntner Sparkasse University of Klagenfurt
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Artificial Intelligence,Software
Reference33 articles.
1. Calimeri, F., Faber, W., Gebser, M., Ianni, G., Kaminski, R., Krennwallner, T., Leone, N., Maratea, M., Ricca, F., & Schaub, T. (2019). ASP-Core-2 input language format. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 20(2), 294–309. 2. Codenotti, P., Katebi, H., Sakallah, K., & Markov, I. (2013). Conflict analysis and branching heuristics in the search for graph automorphisms. In 25th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 907–914. IEEE Computer Society. 3. Cohen, D., Jeavons, P., Jefferson, C., Petrie, K., & Smith, B. (2006). Symmetry definitions for constraint satisfaction problems. Constraints, 11(2–3), 115–137. 4. Cropper, A., Dumančić, S., & Muggleton, S. (2020). Turning 30: New ideas in inductive logic programming. In 29th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 4833–4839. ijcai.org 5. Cropper, A., & Dumančć, S. (2020). Inductive logic programming at 30: A new introduction. https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.07912
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|