Abstract
The phase transition for randomly generated binary Constraint Satisfaction Problems (CSPs) has recently been investigated by Smith[10], Smith & Dyer[11], and Prosser[8, 9]. It was found that in most cases one can accurately predict where the phase transition occurs using a predictor based on the expected number of solutions. Their results are based on a parameterization of CSPs that has a global constraint tightness value, that is, each constraint has the same tightness. In this paper we generalize their results using a parameterization of CSPs that has local constraint tightness values. We give a refined version of their predictor which incorporates the local graph topology of each individual CSP. It is shown that there is a similar phase transition in which constraint tightness does not have to be a global value and that the refined predictor better predicts the location of this phase transition. We also show that random problems generated with the refined predictor are as hard or harder to search than problems generated with the old predictor. Our results indicate that harder phase transitions can be found for NP-complete problems by generalizing the parameterizations used to model the problem in appropriate ways to include the structure of an individual problem.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
P. Cheeseman, B. Kanefsky, and W. Taylor. Where the really hard problems are. In Proceedings IJCAI-91, pages 331–337, 1991.
J. Crawford and L. Auton. Experimental results on the crossover point in satisfiability problems. In Proceedings AAAI-93, pages 21–27, 1993.
M. Dent and R. Mercer. Using local graph topology to model hard binary constraint satisfaction problems. Technical Report UWO-CSD-439, The University of Western Ontario, 1995.
Y. Fu. The use and abuse of statistical mechanics in computational complexity. In D. Stein, editor, Lectures in the Sciences of Complexity, pages 815–826. Addison-Wesley Longman, 1989.
R. Haralick and G. Elliot. Increasing tree search efficiency for constraint satisfaction problems. Artificial Intelligence, 14:263–313, 1980.
D. Mitchell, B. Selman, and H. Levesque. Hard and easy distributions of SAT problems. In Proceedings AAAI-92, pages 459–465, 1992.
P. Prosser. Hybrid algorithms for the constraint satisfaction problem. Computational Intelligence, 9(3):268–299, 1993.
P. Prosser. Binary constraint satisfaction problems: Some are harder than others. In Proceedings ECAI-94, pages 95–99, 1994.
P. Prosser. An empirical study of phase transitions in binary constraint satisfaction problems. Artificial Intelligence, 1996. To appear.
B. Smith. Phase transition and the mushy region in constraint satisfaction problems. In Proceedings ECAI-94, 1994.
B. Smith and M. Dyer. Locating the phase transition in binary constraint satisfaction problems. Artificial Intelligence, 1996. To appear.
E. Tsang. Foundations of Constraint Satisfaction. Academic Press, 1993.
C. Williams and T. Hogg. Using deep structure to locate hard problems. In Proceedings AAAI-92, pages 472–477, 1992.
C. Williams and T. Hogg. Extending deep structure. In Proceedings AAAI-93, pages 152–157, 1993.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1996 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dent, M.J., Mercer, R.E. (1996). A new model of hard binary constraint Satisfaction Problems. In: McCalla, G. (eds) Advances in Artifical Intelligence. Canadian AI 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1081. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61291-2_38
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61291-2_38
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-61291-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68450-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive