3 Search Results for "Bessiere, Christian"

Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2024.20
Constraint Modelling with LLMs Using In-Context Learning

Authors: Kostis Michailidis, Dimos Tsouros, and Tias Guns

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 307, 30th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2024)

Abstract
Constraint Programming (CP) allows for the modelling and solving of a wide range of combinatorial problems. However, modelling such problems using constraints over decision variables still requires significant expertise, both in conceptual thinking and syntactic use of modelling languages. In this work, we explore the potential of using pre-trained Large Language Models (LLMs) as coding assistants, to transform textual problem descriptions into concrete and executable CP specifications. We present different transformation pipelines with explicit intermediate representations, and we investigate the potential benefit of various retrieval-augmented example selection strategies for in-context learning. We evaluate our approach on 2 datasets from the literature, namely NL4Opt (optimisation) and Logic Grid Puzzles (satisfaction), and a heterogeneous set of exercises from a CP course. The results show that pre-trained LLMs have promising potential for initialising the modelling process, with retrieval-augmented in-context learning significantly enhancing their modelling capabilities.
Cite as

Kostis Michailidis, Dimos Tsouros, and Tias Guns. Constraint Modelling with LLMs Using In-Context Learning. In 30th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 307, pp. 20:1-20:27, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{michailidis_et_al:LIPIcs.CP.2024.20,
  author =	{Michailidis, Kostis and Tsouros, Dimos and Guns, Tias},
  title =	{{Constraint Modelling with LLMs Using In-Context Learning}},
  booktitle =	{30th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2024)},
  pages =	{20:1--20:27},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-336-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2024},
  volume =	{307},
  editor =	{Shaw, Paul},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2024.20},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-207053},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2024.20},
  annote =	{Keywords: Constraint Modelling, Constraint Acquisition, Constraint Programming, Large Language Models, In-Context Learning, Natural Language Processing, Named Entity Recognition, Retrieval-Augmented Generation, Optimisation}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/DagMan.10.1.1
Current and Future Challenges in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop 22282)

Authors: James P. Delgrande, Birte Glimm, Thomas Meyer, Miroslaw Truszczynski, and Frank Wolter

Published in: Dagstuhl Manifestos, Volume 10, Issue 1 (2024)

Abstract
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning is a central, longstanding, and active area of Artificial Intelligence. Over the years it has evolved significantly; more recently it has been challenged and complemented by research in areas such as machine learning and reasoning under uncertainty. In July 2022,sser a Dagstuhl Perspectives workshop was held on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. The goal of the workshop was to describe the state of the art in the field, including its relation with other areas, its shortcomings and strengths, together with recommendations for future progress. We developed this manifesto based on the presentations, panels, working groups, and discussions that took place at the Dagstuhl Workshop. It is a declaration of our views on Knowledge Representation: its origins, goals, milestones, and current foci; its relation to other disciplines, especially to Artificial Intelligence; and on its challenges, along with key priorities for the next decade.
Cite as

James P. Delgrande, Birte Glimm, Thomas Meyer, Miroslaw Truszczynski, and Frank Wolter. Current and Future Challenges in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop 22282). In Dagstuhl Manifestos, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp. 1-61, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@Article{delgrande_et_al:DagMan.10.1.1,
  author =	{Delgrande, James P. and Glimm, Birte and Meyer, Thomas and Truszczynski, Miroslaw and Wolter, Frank},
  title =	{{Current and Future Challenges in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop 22282)}},
  pages =	{1--61},
  journal =	{Dagstuhl Manifestos},
  ISSN =	{2193-2433},
  year =	{2024},
  volume =	{10},
  number =	{1},
  editor =	{Delgrande, James P. and Glimm, Birte and Meyer, Thomas and Truszczynski, Miroslaw and Wolter, Frank},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DagMan.10.1.1},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-201403},
  doi =		{10.4230/DagMan.10.1.1},
  annote =	{Keywords: Knowledge representation and reasoning, Applications of logics, Declarative representations, Formal logic}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.9
Complexity of Minimum-Size Arc-Inconsistency Explanations

Authors: Christian Bessiere, Clément Carbonnel, Martin C. Cooper, and Emmanuel Hebrard

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 235, 28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022)

Abstract
Explaining the outcome of programs has become one of the main concerns in AI research. In constraint programming, a user may want the system to explain why a given variable assignment is not feasible or how it came to the conclusion that the problem does not have any solution. One solution to the latter is to return to the user a sequence of simple reasoning steps that lead to inconsistency. Arc consistency is a well-known form of reasoning that can be understood by a human. We consider explanations as sequences of propagation steps of a constraint on a variable (i.e. the ubiquitous revise function in arc consistency algorithms) that lead to inconsistency. We characterize, on binary CSPs, cases for which providing a shortest such explanation is easy: when domains are Boolean or when variables have maximum degree two. However, these polynomial cases are tight. Providing a shortest explanation is NP-hard if the maximum degree is three, even if the number of variables is bounded, or if domain size is bounded by three. It remains NP-hard on trees, despite the fact that arc consistency is a decision procedure on trees. Finally, the problem is not FPT-approximable unless the Gap-ETH is false.
Cite as

Christian Bessiere, Clément Carbonnel, Martin C. Cooper, and Emmanuel Hebrard. Complexity of Minimum-Size Arc-Inconsistency Explanations. In 28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 235, pp. 9:1-9:14, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{bessiere_et_al:LIPIcs.CP.2022.9,
  author =	{Bessiere, Christian and Carbonnel, Cl\'{e}ment and Cooper, Martin C. and Hebrard, Emmanuel},
  title =	{{Complexity of Minimum-Size Arc-Inconsistency Explanations}},
  booktitle =	{28th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2022)},
  pages =	{9:1--9:14},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-240-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2022},
  volume =	{235},
  editor =	{Solnon, Christine},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.9},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-166380},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CP.2022.9},
  annote =	{Keywords: Constraint programming, constraint propagation, minimum explanations, complexity}
}
  • Refine by Author
  • 1 Bessiere, Christian
  • 1 Carbonnel, Clément
  • 1 Cooper, Martin C.
  • 1 Delgrande, James P.
  • 1 Glimm, Birte
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Classification

  • Refine by Keyword
  • 1 Applications of logics
  • 1 Constraint Acquisition
  • 1 Constraint Modelling
  • 1 Constraint Programming
  • 1 Constraint programming
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Type
  • 3 document

  • Refine by Publication Year
  • 2 2024
  • 1 2022

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
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact