Roberto Amadini

AI
h-index13
8papers
144citations
Novelty26%
AI Score31

8 Papers

LGOct 24, 2025
On the flow matching interpretability

Francesco Pivi, Simone Gazza, Davide Evangelista et al.

Generative models based on flow matching have demonstrated remarkable success in various domains, yet they suffer from a fundamental limitation: the lack of interpretability in their intermediate generation steps. In fact these models learn to transform noise into data through a series of vector field updates, however the meaning of each step remains opaque. We address this problem by proposing a general framework constraining each flow step to be sampled from a known physical distribution. Flow trajectories are mapped to (and constrained to traverse) the equilibrium states of the simulated physical process. We implement this approach through the 2D Ising model in such a way that flow steps become thermal equilibrium points along a parametric cooling schedule. Our proposed architecture includes an encoder that maps discrete Ising configurations into a continuous latent space, a flow-matching network that performs temperature-driven diffusion, and a projector that returns to discrete Ising states while preserving physical constraints. We validate this framework across multiple lattice sizes, showing that it preserves physical fidelity while outperforming Monte Carlo generation in speed as the lattice size increases. In contrast with standard flow matching, each vector field represents a meaningful stepwise transition in the 2D Ising model's latent space. This demonstrates that embedding physical semantics into generative flows transforms opaque neural trajectories into interpretable physical processes.

AIFeb 17, 2022
On the evaluation of (meta-)solver approaches

Roberto Amadini, Maurizio Gabbrielli, Tong Liu et al.

Meta-solver approaches exploits a number of individual solvers to potentially build a better solver. To assess the performance of meta-solvers, one can simply adopt the metrics typically used for individual solvers (e.g., runtime or solution quality), or employ more specific evaluation metrics (e.g., by measuring how close the meta-solver gets to its virtual best performance). In this paper, based on some recently published works, we provide an overview of different performance metrics for evaluating (meta-)solvers, by underlying their strengths and weaknesses.

AISep 7, 2020
sunny-as2: Enhancing SUNNY for Algorithm Selection

Tong Liu, Roberto Amadini, Jacopo Mauro et al.

SUNNY is an Algorithm Selection (AS) technique originally tailored for Constraint Programming (CP). SUNNY enables to schedule, from a portfolio of solvers, a subset of solvers to be run on a given CP problem. This approach has proved to be effective for CP problems, and its parallel version won many gold medals in the Open category of the MiniZinc Challenge -- the yearly international competition for CP solvers. In 2015, the ASlib benchmarks were released for comparing AS systems coming from disparate fields (e.g., ASP, QBF, and SAT) and SUNNY was extended to deal with generic AS problems. This led to the development of sunny-as2, an algorithm selector based on SUNNY for ASlib scenarios. A preliminary version of sunny-as2 was submitted to the Open Algorithm Selection Challenge (OASC) in 2017, where it turned out to be the best approach for the runtime minimization of decision problems. In this work, we present the technical advancements of sunny-as2, including: (i) wrapper-based feature selection; (ii) a training approach combining feature selection and neighbourhood size configuration; (iii) the application of nested cross-validation. We show how sunny-as2 performance varies depending on the considered AS scenarios, and we discuss its strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we also show how sunny-as2 improves on its preliminary version submitted to OASC.

AIJan 31, 2020
A Survey on String Constraint Solving

Roberto Amadini

String constraint solving refers to solving combinatorial problems involving constraints over string variables. String solving approaches have become popular over the last years given the massive use of strings in different application domains like formal analysis, automated testing, database query processing, and cybersecurity. This paper reports a comprehensive survey on string constraint solving by exploring the large number of approaches that have been proposed over the last decades to solve string constraints.

AIJun 26, 2017
SUNNY-CP and the MiniZinc Challenge

Roberto Amadini, Maurizio Gabbrielli, Jacopo Mauro

In Constraint Programming (CP) a portfolio solver combines a variety of different constraint solvers for solving a given problem. This fairly recent approach enables to significantly boost the performance of single solvers, especially when multicore architectures are exploited. In this work we give a brief overview of the portfolio solver sunny-cp, and we discuss its performance in the MiniZinc Challenge---the annual international competition for CP solvers---where it won two gold medals in 2015 and 2016. Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

AIFeb 13, 2015
A Multicore Tool for Constraint Solving

Roberto Amadini, Maurizio Gabbrielli, Jacopo Mauro

*** To appear in IJCAI 2015 proceedings *** In Constraint Programming (CP), a portfolio solver uses a variety of different solvers for solving a given Constraint Satisfaction / Optimization Problem. In this paper we introduce sunny-cp2: the first parallel CP portfolio solver that enables a dynamic, cooperative, and simultaneous execution of its solvers in a multicore setting. It incorporates state-of-the-art solvers, providing also a usable and configurable framework. Empirical results are very promising. sunny-cp2 can even outperform the performance of the oracle solver which always selects the best solver of the portfolio for a given problem.

AINov 14, 2013
SUNNY: a Lazy Portfolio Approach for Constraint Solving

Roberto Amadini, Maurizio Gabbrielli, Jacopo Mauro

*** To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) *** Within the context of constraint solving, a portfolio approach allows one to exploit the synergy between different solvers in order to create a globally better solver. In this paper we present SUNNY: a simple and flexible algorithm that takes advantage of a portfolio of constraint solvers in order to compute --- without learning an explicit model --- a schedule of them for solving a given Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP). Motivated by the performance reached by SUNNY vs. different simulations of other state of the art approaches, we developed sunny-csp, an effective portfolio solver that exploits the underlying SUNNY algorithm in order to solve a given CSP. Empirical tests conducted on exhaustive benchmarks of MiniZinc models show that the actual performance of SUNNY conforms to the predictions. This is encouraging both for improving the power of CSP portfolio solvers and for trying to export them to fields such as Answer Set Programming and Constraint Logic Programming.

AIAug 1, 2013
An Enhanced Features Extractor for a Portfolio of Constraint Solvers

Roberto Amadini, Maurizio Gabbrielli, Jacopo Mauro

Recent research has shown that a single arbitrarily efficient solver can be significantly outperformed by a portfolio of possibly slower on-average solvers. The solver selection is usually done by means of (un)supervised learning techniques which exploit features extracted from the problem specification. In this paper we present an useful and flexible framework that is able to extract an extensive set of features from a Constraint (Satisfaction/Optimization) Problem defined in possibly different modeling languages: MiniZinc, FlatZinc or XCSP. We also report some empirical results showing that the performances that can be obtained using these features are effective and competitive with state of the art CSP portfolio techniques.