Learning MAX-SAT Models from Examples Using Genetic Algorithms and Knowledge Compilation

Authors Senne Berden , Mohit Kumar , Samuel Kolb , Tias Guns



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.CP.2022.8.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.93 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Senne Berden
  • Declarative Languages and Artificial Intelligence, KU Leuven, Belgium
Mohit Kumar
  • Declarative Languages and Artificial Intelligence, KU Leuven, Belgium
Samuel Kolb
  • Declarative Languages and Artificial Intelligence, KU Leuven, Belgium
Tias Guns
  • Declarative Languages and Artificial Intelligence, KU Leuven, Belgium

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Luc De Raedt for his helpful comments.

Cite As Get BibTex

Senne Berden, Mohit Kumar, Samuel Kolb, and Tias Guns. Learning MAX-SAT Models from Examples Using Genetic Algorithms and Knowledge Compilation. In 28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 235, pp. 8:1-8:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.8

Abstract

Many real-world problems can be effectively solved by means of combinatorial optimization. However, appropriate models to give to a solver are not always available, and sometimes must be learned from historical data. Although some research has been done in this area, the task of learning (weighted partial) MAX-SAT models has not received much attention thus far, even though such models can be used in many real-world applications. Furthermore, most existing work is limited to learning models from non-contextual data, where instances are labeled as solutions and non-solutions, but without any specification of the contexts in which those labels apply. A recent approach named hassle-sls has addressed these limitations: it can jointly learn hard constraints and weighted soft constraints from labeled contextual examples. However, it is hindered by long runtimes, as evaluating even a single candidate MAX-SAT model requires solving as many models as there are contexts in the training data, which quickly becomes highly expensive when the size of the model increases. In this work, we address these runtime issues. To this end, we make two contributions. First, we propose a faster model evaluation procedure that makes use of knowledge compilation. Second, we propose a genetic algorithm named hassle-gen that decreases the number of evaluations needed to find good models. We experimentally show that both contributions improve on the state of the art by speeding up learning, which in turn allows higher-quality MAX-SAT models to be found within a given learning time budget.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Computing methodologies → Machine learning
Keywords
  • Machine learning
  • constraint learning
  • MAX-SAT

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Roberto Asín Achá and Robert Nieuwenhuis. Curriculum-based course timetabling with SAT and MaxSAT. Annals of Operations Research, 218(1):71-91, 2014. Google Scholar
  2. R Iris Bahar, Erica A Frohm, Charles M Gaona, Gary D Hachtel, Enrico Macii, Abelardo Pardo, and Fabio Somenzi. Algebraic decision diagrams and their applications. Formal Methods in System Design, 10(2):171-206, 1997. Google Scholar
  3. Nicolas Beldiceanu and Helmut Simonis. A model seeker: Extracting global constraint models from positive examples. In International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, pages 141-157. Springer, 2012. Google Scholar
  4. Christian Bessiere, Remi Coletta, Emmanuel Hebrard, George Katsirelos, Nadjib Lazaar, Nina Narodytska, Claude-Guy Quimper, and Toby Walsh. Constraint acquisition via partial queries. In Twenty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2013. Google Scholar
  5. Christian Bessiere, Remi Coletta, Frédéric Koriche, and Barry O'Sullivan. A SAT-based version space algorithm for acquiring constraint satisfaction problems. In European Conference on Machine Learning, pages 23-34. Springer, 2005. Google Scholar
  6. Christian Bessiere, Remi Coletta, Barry O'Sullivan, Mathias Paulin, et al. Query-driven constraint acquisition. In IJCAI, volume 7, pages 50-55, 2007. Google Scholar
  7. Paolo Campigotto, Roberto Battiti, and Andrea Passerini. Learning modulo theories for preference elicitation in hybrid domains. CoRR, abs/1508.04261, 2015. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1508.04261.
  8. Luc De Raedt, Andrea Passerini, and Stefano Teso. Learning constraints from examples. In Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2018. Google Scholar
  9. Emir Demirović, Nysret Musliu, and Felix Winter. Modeling and solving staff scheduling with partial weighted maxSAT. Annals of Operations Research, 275(1):79-99, 2019. Google Scholar
  10. Agoston E Eiben and James E Smith. Introduction to evolutionary computing, volume 53. Springer, 2003. Google Scholar
  11. David Edward Goldberg. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1989. Google Scholar
  12. Michael Huth and Mark Ryan. Logic in computer science: Modelling and reasoning about systems. Cambridge University Press, 2004. Google Scholar
  13. Samuel Kolb. Learning constraints and optimization criteria. In Workshops at the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2016. Google Scholar
  14. Samuel Kolb, Stefano Teso, Andrea Passerini, and Luc De Raedt. Learning SMT(LRA) constraints using SMT solvers. In IJCAI, volume 18, pages 2333-2340, 2018. Google Scholar
  15. Mohit Kumar, Samuel Kolb, Luc De Raedt, and Stefano Teso. Learning mixed-integer linear programs from contextual examples, 2021. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2107.07136.
  16. Mohit Kumar, Samuel Kolb, Stefano Teso, and Luc De Raedt. Learning MAX-SAT from contextual examples for combinatorial optimisation. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 34(04):4493-4500, April 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v34i04.5877.
  17. Mohit Kumar, Samuel Kolb, Stefano Teso, and Luc De Raedt. Learning MAX-SAT from contextual examples for combinatorial optimisation, 2022. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.03888.
  18. Chu Min Li and Felip Manya. MaxSAT, hard and soft constraints. In Handbook of satisfiability, pages 613-631. IOS Press, 2009. Google Scholar
  19. Samir W Mahfoud et al. Crowding and preselection revisited. In PPSN, volume 2, pages 27-36. Citeseer, 1992. Google Scholar
  20. Patrick Mills and Edward Tsang. Guided local search for solving sat and weighted max-sat problems. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 24(1):205-223, 2000. Google Scholar
  21. Melanie Mitchell. An introduction to genetic algorithms. MIT Press, 1998. Google Scholar
  22. Tomasz P Pawlak and Krzysztof Krawiec. Synthesis of mathematical programming constraints with genetic programming. In European Conference on Genetic Programming, pages 178-193. Springer, 2017. Google Scholar
  23. Émilie Picard-Cantin, Mathieu Bouchard, Claude-Guy Quimper, and Jason Sweeney. Learning parameters for the sequence constraint from solutions. In International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, pages 405-420. Springer, 2016. Google Scholar
  24. Émilie Picard-Cantin, Mathieu Bouchard, Claude-Guy Quimper, and Jason Sweeney. Learning the parameters of global constraints using branch-and-bound. In International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, pages 512-528. Springer, 2017. Google Scholar
  25. Nathan Robinson, Charles Gretton, Duc Nghia Pham, and Abdul Sattar. Partial weighted MaxSAT for optimal planning. In Pacific Rim International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 231-243. Springer, 2010. Google Scholar
  26. Sean Safarpour, Hratch Mangassarian, Andreas Veneris, Mark H Liffiton, and Karem A Sakallah. Improved design debugging using maximum satisfiability. In Formal Methods in Computer Aided Design (FMCAD'07), pages 13-19. IEEE, 2007. Google Scholar
  27. Qiang Yang, Kangheng Wu, and Yunfei Jiang. Learning action models from plan examples using weighted MAX-SAT. Artificial Intelligence, 171(2-3):107-143, 2007. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail