Richard Taupe

Richard Comploi-Taupe, Gerhard Friedrich, Konstantin Schekotihin et al.

Domain-specific heuristics are an essential technique for solving combinatorial problems efficiently. Current approaches to integrate domain-specific heuristics with Answer Set Programming (ASP) are unsatisfactory when dealing with heuristics that are specified non-monotonically on the basis of partial assignments. Such heuristics frequently occur in practice, for example, when picking an item that has not yet been placed in bin packing. Therefore, we present novel syntax and semantics for declarative specifications of domain-specific heuristics in ASP. Our approach supports heuristic statements that depend on the partial assignment maintained during solving, which has not been possible before. We provide an implementation in ALPHA that makes ALPHA the first lazy-grounding ASP system to support declaratively specified domain-specific heuristics. Two practical example domains are used to demonstrate the benefits of our proposal. Additionally, we use our approach to implement informed} search with A*, which is tackled within ASP for the first time. A* is applied to two further search problems. The experiments confirm that combining lazy-grounding ASP solving and our novel heuristics can be vital for solving industrial-size problems.

Richard Comploi-Taupe, Giulia Francescutto, Gottfried Schenner

In this paper, we apply incremental answer set solving to product configuration. Incremental answer set solving is a step-wise incremental approach to Answer Set Programming (ASP). We demonstrate how to use this technique to solve product configurations problems incrementally. Every step of the incremental solving process corresponds to a predefined configuration action. Using complex domain-specific configuration actions makes it possible to tightly control the level of non-determinism and performance of the solving process. We show applications of this technique for reasoning about product configuration, like simulating the behavior of a deterministic configuration algorithm and describing user actions.

Richard Comploi-Taupe

Domain-specific heuristics are a crucial technique for the efficient solving of problems that are large or computationally hard. Answer Set Programming (ASP) systems support declarative specifications of domain-specific heuristics to improve solving performance. However, such heuristics must be invented manually so far. Inventing domain-specific heuristics for answer-set programs requires expertise with the domain under consideration and familiarity with ASP syntax, semantics, and solving technology. The process of inventing useful heuristics would highly profit from automatic support. This paper presents a novel approach to the automatic learning of such heuristics. We use Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) to learn declarative domain-specific heuristics from examples stemming from (near-)optimal answer sets of small but representative problem instances. Our experimental results indicate that the learned heuristics can improve solving performance and solution quality when solving larger, harder instances of the same problem.

Lucia Balážová, Richard Comploi-Taupe, Susana Hahn et al.

Product configuration is a successful application of Answer Set Programming (ASP). However, challenges are still open for interactive systems to effectively guide users through the configuration process. The aim of our work is to provide an ASP-based solver for interactive configuration that can deal with large-scale industrial configuration problems and that supports intuitive user interfaces via an API. In this paper, we focus on improving the performance of automatically completing a partial configuration. Our main contribution enhances the classical incremental approach for multi-shot solving by four different smart expansion functions. The core idea is to determine and add specific objects or associations to the partial configuration by exploiting cautious and brave consequences before checking for the existence of a complete configuration with the current objects in each iteration. This approach limits the number of costly unsatisfiability checks and reduces the search space, thereby improving solving performance. In addition, we present a user interface that uses our API and is implemented in ASP.

Antonius Weinzierl, Richard Taupe, Gerhard Friedrich

Answer-Set Programming (ASP) is a powerful and expressive knowledge representation paradigm with a significant number of applications in logic-based AI. The traditional ground-and-solve approach, however, requires ASP programs to be grounded upfront and thus suffers from the so-called grounding bottleneck (i.e., ASP programs easily exhaust all available memory and thus become unsolvable). As a remedy, lazy-grounding ASP solvers have been developed, but many state-of-the-art techniques for grounded ASP solving have not been available to them yet. In this work we present, for the first time, adaptions to the lazy-grounding setting for many important techniques, like restarts, phase saving, domain-independent heuristics, and learned-clause deletion. Furthermore, we investigate their effects and in general observe a large improvement in solving capabilities and also uncover negative effects in certain cases, indicating the need for portfolio solving as known from other solvers. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.

Richard Taupe, Antonius Weinzierl, Gerhard Friedrich

Generalising and re-using knowledge learned while solving one problem instance has been neglected by state-of-the-art answer set solvers. We suggest a new approach that generalises learned nogoods for re-use to speed-up the solving of future problem instances. Our solution combines well-known ASP solving techniques with deductive logic-based machine learning. Solving performance can be improved by adding learned non-ground constraints to the original program. We demonstrate the effects of our method by means of realistic examples, showing that our approach requires low computational cost to learn constraints that yield significant performance benefits in our test cases. These benefits can be seen with ground-and-solve systems as well as lazy-grounding systems. However, ground-and-solve systems suffer from additional grounding overheads, induced by the additional constraints in some cases. By means of conflict minimization, non-minimal learned constraints can be reduced. This can result in significant reductions of grounding and solving efforts, as our experiments show. (Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.)

Richard Taupe, Konstantin Schekotihin, Peter Schüller et al.

Domain-specific heuristics are an important technique for solving combinatorial problems efficiently. We propose a novel semantics for declarative specifications of domain-specific heuristics in Answer Set Programming (ASP). Decision procedures that are based on a partial solution are a frequent ingredient of existing domain-specific heuristics, e.g., for placing an item that has not been placed yet in bin packing. Therefore, in our novel semantics negation as failure and aggregates in heuristic conditions are evaluated on a partial solver state. State-of-the-art solvers do not allow such a declarative specification. Our implementation in the lazy-grounding ASP system Alpha supports heuristic directives under this semantics. By that, we also provide the first implementation for incorporating declaratively specified domain-specific heuristics in a lazy-grounding setting. Experiments confirm that the combination of ASP solving with lazy grounding and our novel heuristics can be a vital ingredient for solving industrial-size problems.

Richard Taupe, Antonius Weinzierl, Gerhard Friedrich

The traditional ground-and-solve approach to Answer Set Programming (ASP) suffers from the grounding bottleneck, which makes large-scale problem instances unsolvable. Lazy grounding is an alternative approach that interleaves grounding with solving and thus uses space more efficiently. The limited view on the search space in lazy grounding poses unique challenges, however, and can have adverse effects on solving performance. In this paper we present a novel characterization of degrees of laziness in grounding for ASP, i.e. of compromises between lazily grounding as little as possible and the traditional full grounding upfront. We investigate how these degrees of laziness compare to each other formally as well as, by means of an experimental analysis using a number of benchmarks, in terms of their effects on solving performance. Our contributions are the introduction of a range of novel lazy grounding strategies, a formal account on their relationships and their correctness, and an investigation of their effects on solving performance. Experiments show that our approach performs significantly better than state-of-the-art lazy grounding in many cases.