Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Finding Similar or Diverse Solutions in Answer Set Programming

  • Conference paper
Logic Programming (ICLP 2009)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 5649))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We study finding similar or diverse solutions of a given computational problem, in answer set programming, and introduce offline methods and online methods to compute them using answer set solvers. We analyze the computational complexity of some problems that are related to finding similar or diverse solutions, and show the applicability and effectiveness of our methods in phylogeny reconstruction.

This work has been supported by TUBITAK Grant 107E229 and the Wolfgang Pauli Institute, Vienna.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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. Adams, E.N.: Consensus techniques and the comparison of taxonomic trees. Syst. Zool 21, 390–397 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bailleux, O., Marquis, P.: DISTANCE-SAT: complexity and algorithms. In: Proc. of AAAI, pp. 642–647 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bluis, J., Shin, D.-G.: Nodal distance algorithm: Calculating a phylogenetic tree comparison metric. In: Proc. of BIBE, p. 87 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brooks, D.R., Erdem, E., Erdoğan, S.T., Minett, J.W., Ringe, D.: Inferring phylogenetic trees using answer set programming. JAR 39(4), 471–511 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Brooks, D.R., Erdem, E., Minett, J.W., Ringe, D.: Character-based cladistics and answer set programming. In: Proc. of PADL, pp. 37–51 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brooks, D.R., McLennan, D.A.: Phylogeny, Ecology, and Behavior: A Research Program in Comparative Biology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chen, Z.-Z., Toda, S.: The Complexity of Selecting Maximal Solutions. Information and Computation 119, 231–239 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Davis, M., Logemann, G., Loveland, D.: A machine program for theorem-proving. Communications of the ACM 5, 394–397 (1962)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Eiter, T., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Heterogeneous active agents, ii: Algorithms and complexity. Artif. Intell. 108(1-2), 257–307 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Gebser, M., Kaufmann, B., Neumann, A., Schaub, T.: Conflict-driven answer set solving. In: Proc. of IJCAI, pp. 386–392 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Goldberg, E., Novikov, Y.: Berkmin: A fast and robust sat-solver. Discrete Appl. Math. 155(12), 1549–1561 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Hebrard, E., Hnich, B., O’Sullivan, B., Walsh, T.: Finding diverse and similar solutions in constraint programming. In: Proc. of AAAI, pp. 372–377 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hebrard, E., O’Sullivan, B., Walsh, T.: Distance constraints in constraint satisfaction. In: Proc. of IJCAI, pp. 106–111 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hon, W.-K., Kao, M.-Y., Lam, T.-W.: Improved Phylogeny Comparisons: Non-shared Edges, Nearest Neighbor Interchanges, and Subtree Transfers. In: Hon, W.-K., Kao, M.-Y., Lam, T.-W. (eds.) Algorithms and Computation, pp. 369–382. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lifschitz, V.: Action languages, answer sets and planning. In: The Logic Programming Paradigm: a 25-Year Perspective, pp. 357–373. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Marques-Silva, J., Sakallah, K.: A search algorithm for propositional satisfiability. IEEE Trans. Computers 5, 506–521 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Nye, T.M., Lio, P., Gilks, W.R.: A novel algorithm and web-based tool for comparing two alternative phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 22(1), 117–119 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Papadimitriou, C.: Computational Complexity. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Ringe, D., Warnow, T., Taylor, A.: Indo-European and computational cladistics. Transactions of the Philological Society 100(1), 59–129 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Robinson, D.F., Foulds, L.R.: Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Mathematical Biosciences 53(1-2), 131–147 (1981)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Semple, C., Steel, M.: A supertree method for rooted trees. Discrete Applied Mathematics 105, 147–158 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Soininen, T., Niemelä, I.: Developing a declarative rule language for applications in product configuration. In: Proc. of PADL, pp. 305–319 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  23. White, J.P., O’Connell, J.F.: A Prehistory of Australia, New Guinea, and Sahul. Academic, San Diego (1982)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Information Systems, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria

    Thomas Eiter & Michael Fink

  2. Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Sabancı University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Esra Erdem & Halit Erdoğan

Authors
  1. Thomas Eiter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Esra Erdem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Halit Erdoğan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Fink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computing, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK

    Patricia M. Hill

  2. Deptartment of Computer Science, Stony Brook University, 11794-4400, Stony Brook, NY, USA

    David S. Warren

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Eiter, T., Erdem, E., Erdoğan, H., Fink, M. (2009). Finding Similar or Diverse Solutions in Answer Set Programming . In: Hill, P.M., Warren, D.S. (eds) Logic Programming. ICLP 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5649. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02846-5_29

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02846-5_29

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-02845-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-02846-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation