Skip to main content

Automatically Decomposing Configuration Problems

  • Conference paper
AI*IA 2003: Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI*IA 2003)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2829))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Configuration was one of the first tasks successfully approached via AI techniques. However, solving configuration problems can be computationally expensive. In this work, we show that the decomposition of a configuration problem into a set of simpler and independent subproblems can decrease the computational cost of solving it. In particular, we describe a novel decomposition technique exploiting the compositional structure of complex objects and we show experimentally that such a decomposition can improve the efficiency of configurators.

This work has been partially supported by ASI (Italian Space Agency).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Fleischanderl, G., Friedrich, G.E., Haselböck, A., Schreiner, H., Stumptner, M.: Configuring large systems using generative constraint satisfaction. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 59–68 (July/August 1998)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fleischanderl, G., Haselböck, A.: Thoughts on partitioning large-scale configuration problems. AAAI 1996 Fall Symposium Series, pp. 1–10 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Friedrich, G., Stumptner, M.: Consistency-based configuration. In: AAAI 1999, Workshop on Configuration (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Geneste, L., Ruet, M.: Fuzzy case based configuration. In: Proc. ECAI, Configuration WS, pp. 71–76 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Mackworth, A.K.: Consistency in networks of relations. Artificial Intelligence 8, 99–118 (1977)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Magro, D., Torasso, P.: Interactive configuration capability in a sale support system: Laziness and focusing mechanisms. In: Proc. IJCAI 2001 Configuration WS, pp. 57–63 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Magro, D., Torasso, P.: Supporting product configuration in a virtual store. In: Esposito, F. (ed.) AI*IA 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2175, pp. 176–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Magro, D., Torasso, P.: Decomposition strategies for configuration problems. AIEDAM 17(1) (2003) (special Issue on Configuration)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Magro, D., Torasso, P., Anselma, L.: Problem decomposition in configuration. In: Proc. ECAI 2002 Configuration WS, pp. 50–55 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  10. McDermott, J.: R1: A rule-based configurer of computer systems. Artificial Intelligence 19, 39–88 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. McGuinness, D.L., Wright, J.R.: An industrial-strength description logic-based configurator platform. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 69–77 (July/August 1998)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mittal, S., Falkenhainer, B.: Dynamic constraint satisfaction problems. In: Proc. of the AAAI 1990, pp. 25–32 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sabin, D., Freuder, E.C.: Configuration as composite constraint satisfaction. In: Proc. Artificial Intelligence and Manufacturing. Research Planning Workshop, pp. 153–161 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sinz, C.: Knowledge compilation for product configuration. In: Proc. ECAI 2002 Configuration WS, pp. 23–26 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Soininen, T., Gelle, E., Niemelä, I.: A fixpoint definition of dynamic constraint satisfaction. In: Jaffar, J. (ed.) CP 1999. LNCS, vol. 1713, pp. 419–434. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Soininen, T., Niemelä, I., Tiihonen, J., Sulonen, R.: Representing configuration knowledge with weight constraint rules. In: Proc. of the AAAI 2001 Symposium on Answer Set Programming ( Spring 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tiihonen, J., Soininen, T., Niemelä, I., Sulonen, R.: Empirical testing of a weight constraint rule based configurator. In: Proc. ECAI 2002 Configuration WS, pp. 17–22 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Veron, M., Aldanondo, M.: Yet another approach to ccsp for configuration problem. In: Proc. ECAI, Configuration WS, pp. 59–62 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Anselma, L., Magro, D., Torasso, P. (2003). Automatically Decomposing Configuration Problems. In: Cappelli, A., Turini, F. (eds) AI*IA 2003: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. AI*IA 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2829. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39853-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39853-0_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-20119-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-39853-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics