Add more about the MiniZinc structure
This commit is contained in:
parent
d320377c3a
commit
87ff8426f3
@ -69,11 +69,6 @@
|
||||
description={},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
\newglossaryentry{variable}{
|
||||
name={decision variable},
|
||||
description={},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
\newglossaryentry{domain}{
|
||||
name={domain},
|
||||
description={},
|
||||
@ -200,6 +195,11 @@
|
||||
description={},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
\newglossaryentry{variable}{
|
||||
name={decision variable},
|
||||
description={},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
\newglossaryentry{zinc}{
|
||||
name={Zinc},
|
||||
description={},
|
||||
|
@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ Freuder states that the ``Holy Grail'' of programming languages would be where
|
||||
the user merely states the problem, and the computer solves it and that
|
||||
\gls{constraint-modelling} is one of the biggest steps towards this goal to this
|
||||
day \autocite*{freuder-1997-holygrail}. Different from imperative (and even
|
||||
other declarative) languages, in a \cml\ the modeller does not describe how to
|
||||
other declarative) languages, in a \cml{} the modeller does not describe how to
|
||||
solve the problem, but rather provides the problem requirements. You could say
|
||||
that a constraint model actually describes the solution to the problem.
|
||||
|
||||
@ -23,14 +23,12 @@ already know, the \glspl{parameter}, what we wish to know, the \glspl{variable},
|
||||
and the relationships that should exist between them, the \glspl{constraint}.
|
||||
|
||||
This type of combinatorial problem is typically called a \gls{csp}. Many \cmls\
|
||||
also support the modelling of \gls{cop}, where a \gls{csp} is augmented with an
|
||||
\gls{objective} \(z\). In this case the goal is to find an solution that
|
||||
also support the modelling of \gls{cop}, where a \gls{csp} is augmented with a
|
||||
\gls{objective} \(z\). In this case the goal is to find a solution that
|
||||
satisfies all \glspl{constraint} while minimising (or maximising) \(z\).
|
||||
|
||||
Although a constraint model does not contain any instructions to find a suitable
|
||||
solution, dedicated solving programs exist
|
||||
|
||||
these models can generally be given to a dedicated solving program, or
|
||||
solution, these models can generally be given to a dedicated solving program, or
|
||||
\gls{solver} for short, that can find a solution that fits the requirements of
|
||||
the model.
|
||||
|
||||
@ -59,7 +57,7 @@ the model.
|
||||
knapsack problem} \autocite[13--67]{silvano-1990-knapsack}. A commonly used
|
||||
solution to this problem is based on dynamic programming. An implementation of
|
||||
this approach is shown in \cref{lst:2-dyn-knapsack}. The use of dynamic
|
||||
programming avoid the exponential growth of the problem when increasing the
|
||||
programming avoids the exponential growth of the problem when increasing the
|
||||
number of toys.
|
||||
|
||||
Although expert knowledge can sometimes bring you an efficient solution to a
|
||||
@ -92,13 +90,13 @@ the model.
|
||||
the \gls{parameter} \(C\) is that depicts the total space that is left in the
|
||||
car before packing the toys.
|
||||
|
||||
This constraint model gives a abstract mathematical definition of the
|
||||
This constraint model gives an abstract mathematical definition of the
|
||||
\gls{cop} that would be easy to adjust to changes in the requirements. To
|
||||
solve instances of this problem, however, these instances have to be
|
||||
transformed into input accepted by a \gls{solver}. \cmls\ are designed to
|
||||
allow the modeller to express combinatorial problems in a similar fashion to
|
||||
the above mathematical definition and generate a definition that can be used
|
||||
by dedicated solvers.
|
||||
transformed into input accepted by a \gls{solver}. \cmls{} are designed to
|
||||
allow the modeller to express combinatorial problems similar to the above
|
||||
mathematical definition and generate a definition that can be used by
|
||||
dedicated solvers.
|
||||
|
||||
\end{example}
|
||||
|
||||
@ -114,7 +112,7 @@ and \gls{clp}.
|
||||
\section{\glsentrytext{minizinc}}%
|
||||
\label{sec:back-minizinc}
|
||||
|
||||
\minizinc\ is a high-level, solver- and data-independent modelling language for
|
||||
\minizinc{} is a high-level, solver- and data-independent modelling language for
|
||||
discrete satisfiability and optimisation problems
|
||||
\autocite{nethercote-2007-minizinc}. Its expressive language and extensive
|
||||
library of constraints allow users to easily model complex problems.
|
||||
@ -143,21 +141,21 @@ library of constraints allow users to easily model complex problems.
|
||||
The model then declares its \glspl{variable}. \Lref{line:back:knap:sel}
|
||||
declares the main \gls{variable} \mzninline{selection}, which represents the
|
||||
selection of toys to be packed. \(S\) in our earlier model. We also declare
|
||||
the variable \mzninline{total_joy}, on \lref{line:back:knap:tj}, which is
|
||||
functionally defined to be the summation of all the joy for the toy picked in
|
||||
our selection.
|
||||
the \gls{variable} \mzninline{total_joy}, on \lref{line:back:knap:tj}, which
|
||||
is functionally defined to be the summation of all the joy for the toy picked
|
||||
in our selection.
|
||||
|
||||
Finally, the model contains a constraint, on \lref{line:back:knap:con}, to
|
||||
ensure we do not exceed the given capacity and states the goal for the solver:
|
||||
to maximise the value of the variable \mzninline{total_joy}.
|
||||
to maximise the value of the \gls{variable} \mzninline{total_joy}.
|
||||
\end{example}
|
||||
|
||||
One might note that, although more textual and explicit, the \minizinc\ model
|
||||
definition is very similar to our earlier mathematical definition.
|
||||
|
||||
Given ground assignments to input \glspl{parameter}, a \minizinc\ model is
|
||||
translated (via a process called \emph{flattening}) into a set of variables and
|
||||
primitive constraints.
|
||||
translated (via a process called \emph{flattening}) into a set of
|
||||
\glspl{variable} and primitive constraints.
|
||||
|
||||
Given the assignments
|
||||
|
||||
@ -181,29 +179,103 @@ solve maximize total_joy;
|
||||
\end{mzn}
|
||||
|
||||
This \emph{flat} problem will be passed to some \gls{solver}, which will attempt
|
||||
to determine an assignment to each decision variable \mzninline{solection_i} and
|
||||
to determine an assignment to each \gls{variable} \mzninline{solection_i} and
|
||||
\mzninline{total_joy} that satisfies all constraints and maximises
|
||||
\mzninline{total_joy}, or report that there is no such assignment.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Model Structure}%
|
||||
\label{subsec:back-mzn-structure}
|
||||
|
||||
As we have seen in \cref{ex:back-mzn-knapsack}, a \minizinc\ model generally
|
||||
contains value declarations, both for \glspl{variable} and input
|
||||
\glspl{parameter}, \glspl{constraint}, and a solving goal. More complex models
|
||||
might also include definitions for custom types, user defined functions, and a
|
||||
custom output format. In \minizinc\ these items are not constrained to occur in
|
||||
any particular order. We will briefly discuss the most important model items.
|
||||
For a detailed overview of the structure of \minizinc\ models you can consult
|
||||
the full syntactic structure of \minizinc\ 2.5.5 in \cref{ch:minizinc-grammar}.
|
||||
Nethercote et al.\ and Mariott et al.\ offer a detailed discussion of the
|
||||
\minizinc\ and \zinc\ language, its predecessor, respectively
|
||||
\autocite*{nethercote-2007-minizinc,marriott-2008-zinc}.
|
||||
|
||||
Values in \minizinc\ are declared in the form \mzninline{@\(T\)@: @\(I\)@ =
|
||||
@\(E\)@;}. \(T\) is the type of the declared value, \(I\) is a new identifier
|
||||
used to reference the declared value, and, optionally, the modeller can
|
||||
functionally define the value using an expression \(E\). The identifier used in
|
||||
a top-level value definition must be unique. Two declarations with the same
|
||||
identifier will result in an error during the flattening process.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{MiniZinc Types}%
|
||||
\label{subsec:back-mzn-type}
|
||||
The main types used in \minizinc\ are Boolean, integer, floating point numbers,
|
||||
sets of integers, and (user-defined) enumerated types. These types can be used
|
||||
both as normal \glspl{parameter} and as \glspl{variable}. To better structure
|
||||
models, \minizinc\ allows collections of these types to be contained in arrays.
|
||||
Unlike other languages, arrays can have a user defined index set, which can
|
||||
start at any value, but has to be a continuous range. For example, an array
|
||||
going from 5 to 10 of new boolean \glspl{variable} might be declared as
|
||||
|
||||
\jip{TODO:\@ Here we talk about the different types in \minizinc. The main types
|
||||
used in \minizinc\ are Booleans, integers, floating point numbers, sets of
|
||||
integers, enumerated types. These types can be used both as normal
|
||||
\glspl{parameter} and as \glspl{variable}. \minizinc\ is allows all these
|
||||
types to be contained in arrays. Unlike other languages, arrays can have a
|
||||
user defined index set. Although the index can start at any value the set is
|
||||
forced to be a range. \minizinc\ also has an annotation type, annotations can
|
||||
be either a declared name or a function call. These annotations can be
|
||||
attached to \minizinc\ expressions, declarations, or constraints. }
|
||||
\begin{mzn}
|
||||
array[5..10] of var bool: bs;
|
||||
\end{mzn}
|
||||
|
||||
\jip{This should explain array types}
|
||||
The type in a declaration can, however, be more complex when the modeller uses a
|
||||
type expression. These expressions constrain a declaration, not just to a
|
||||
certain type, but also to a set of value. This set of values is generally
|
||||
referred to as the \gls{domain} of a \gls{variable}. In \minizinc\ any
|
||||
expression that has a set type can be used as a type expression. For example,
|
||||
the following two declarations
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{mzn}
|
||||
var 3..5: x;
|
||||
var {1,3,5}: y;
|
||||
\end{mzn}
|
||||
|
||||
declare two integer \glspl{variable} that can take the values from three to five and
|
||||
one, three, and five respectively.
|
||||
|
||||
If the declaration includes an expression to functionally define the value, then
|
||||
the identifier can be used as a name for this expression. If, however, the type
|
||||
of the declaration is given as a type expression, then this places an implicit
|
||||
\gls{constraint} on the expression, forcing the result of the expression to take
|
||||
a value according to the type expression.
|
||||
|
||||
\gls{constraint} items, \mzninline{constraint @\(E\)@;} contain the top-level
|
||||
constraint of the \minizinc\ model. A constraint item contains only a single
|
||||
expression \(E\) of Boolean type. During the flattening of the model the
|
||||
expressions in constraints are translated into solver level versions of the same
|
||||
expression. It is important that the solver-level versions of the expressions
|
||||
are equisatisfiable, meaning they are only satisfied if-and-only-if the original
|
||||
expression would have been satisfied.
|
||||
|
||||
A \minizinc\ model can contain a single goal item. This item can signal the
|
||||
solver to do one of three actions: to find an assignment to the \glspl{variable}
|
||||
that satisfies the constraints, \mzninline{solve satisfy;}, to find an
|
||||
assignment to the \glspl{variable} that satisfies the constraints and minimises
|
||||
the value of a \gls{variable}, \mzninline{solve minimize x;}, or similarly
|
||||
maximises the value of a \gls{variable}, \mzninline{solve maximize x;}.
|
||||
|
||||
Common structures in \minizinc\ can be captured using function declarations. A
|
||||
user can declare a function \mzninline{function @\(T\)@: @\(I\)@(@\(P\)@) = E;}.
|
||||
In the function declaration \(T\) is the type of the result of the function,
|
||||
\(I\) is the identifier for the function, \(P\) is a list types and identifiers
|
||||
for the parameters of the functions, and finally \(E\) is the expression that
|
||||
can use the parameters \(P\) and when flattened will give the result of the
|
||||
function. The \minizinc\ language offers the keywords \mzninline{predicate} and
|
||||
\mzninline{test} as a shorthand for \mzninline{function var bool} and
|
||||
\mzninline{function bool} respectively. For example a function that squares an
|
||||
integer can be defined as follows.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{mzn}
|
||||
function int: square(int: a) = a * a;
|
||||
\end{mzn}
|
||||
|
||||
Function declarations are also the main way in which \gls{solver} libraries are
|
||||
defined. During flattening all \minizinc\ expressions are (eventually) rewritten
|
||||
to function calls. A solver can then provide its own implementation for these
|
||||
functions. It is assumed that the implementation of the functions in the
|
||||
\gls{solver} libraries will ultimately be rewritten into fully relational call.
|
||||
When a relational constraint is directly supported by a solver the function
|
||||
should be declared within an expression body. Any call to such function is
|
||||
directly placed in the flattened model.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{MiniZinc Expressions}%
|
||||
\label{subsec:back-mzn-expr}
|
||||
@ -211,20 +283,18 @@ to determine an assignment to each decision variable \mzninline{solection_i} and
|
||||
One of the powers of the \minizinc\ language is the extensive expression
|
||||
language that it offers to help modellers create models that are intuitive to
|
||||
read, but are transformed to fit the structure best suited to the chosen
|
||||
\gls{solver}. We will now briefly discussed the most important \minizinc\
|
||||
expressions and the general methods employed when flattening them. For a
|
||||
detailed overview of all \minizinc\ you can consult the full syntactic structure
|
||||
of the \minizinc\ expressions in \minizinc\ 2.5.5 can be found in
|
||||
\cref{sec:mzn-grammar-expressions}. Nethercote et al.\ and Mariott et al.\ offer
|
||||
a detailed discussion of the expression language of \minizinc\ and its
|
||||
predecessor \zinc\ respectively
|
||||
\gls{solver}. We will now briefly discuss the most important \minizinc\
|
||||
expressions and the general methods employed when flattening them. A detailed
|
||||
overview of the full syntactic structure of the \minizinc\ expressions in
|
||||
\minizinc\ 2.5.5 can be found in \cref{sec:mzn-grammar-expressions}. Nethercote
|
||||
et al.\ and Mariott et al.\ offer a detailed discussion of the expression
|
||||
language of \minizinc\ and its predecessor \zinc\ respectively
|
||||
\autocite*{nethercote-2007-minizinc,marriott-2008-zinc}.
|
||||
|
||||
\Glspl{global} are the basic building blocks in the \minizinc\ language. These
|
||||
expressions capture common (complex) relations between variables. \Glspl{global}
|
||||
in the \minizinc\ language are used as function calls. An example of a
|
||||
\gls{global} is
|
||||
|
||||
expressions capture common (complex) relations between \glspl{variable}.
|
||||
\Glspl{global} in the \minizinc\ language are used as function calls. An example
|
||||
of a \gls{global} is
|
||||
\begin{mzn}
|
||||
predicate knapsack(
|
||||
array [int] of int: w,
|
||||
@ -237,9 +307,9 @@ predicate knapsack(
|
||||
|
||||
This \gls{global} expresses the knapsack relationship, where the
|
||||
\glspl{parameter} \mzninline{w} are the weights of the items, \mzninline{p} are
|
||||
the profit for each items, the \glspl{variable} in \mzninline{x} represent the
|
||||
the profit for each item, the \glspl{variable} in \mzninline{x} represent the
|
||||
amount of time the items are present in the knapsack, and \mzninline{W} and
|
||||
\mzninline{P}, repectively, represent the weight and profit of the knapsack.
|
||||
\mzninline{P}, respectively, represent the weight and profit of the knapsack.
|
||||
|
||||
Note that the usage of this \gls{global} might have simplified the \minizinc\
|
||||
model in \cref{ex:back-mzn-knapsack}:
|
||||
@ -252,12 +322,12 @@ The usage of this \gls{global} has the additional benefit that the knapsack
|
||||
structure of the problem is then known to the \gls{solver} which might implement
|
||||
special handling of the relationship.
|
||||
|
||||
Although \minizinc\ contains a extensive library of \glspl{global}, many
|
||||
Although \minizinc\ contains an extensive library of \glspl{global}, many
|
||||
problems contain constraints that aren't covered by a \gls{global}. There are
|
||||
many other expression forms in \minizinc\ that can help modellers express a
|
||||
constraint.
|
||||
|
||||
\Gls{operator} symbols in \minizinc\ are used as short hands for \minizinc\
|
||||
\Gls{operator} symbols in \minizinc\ are used as a shorthand for \minizinc\
|
||||
functions that can be used to transform or combine other expressions. For
|
||||
example the constraint
|
||||
|
||||
@ -274,19 +344,18 @@ comparison, and Boolean negation functions respectively. Although the
|
||||
different (overloaded) versions of these functions will be used during
|
||||
flattening. For \glspl{parameter} types the result of the function can be
|
||||
directly computed, but when flattening these functions with \glspl{variable}
|
||||
types a new variable for its result must be introduced and a constraints
|
||||
types a new \gls{variable} for its result must be introduced and a constraint
|
||||
enforcing the functional relationship.
|
||||
|
||||
The choice between different expressions can often be expressed using a
|
||||
\gls{conditional} expression, sometimes better known as an ``if-then-else''
|
||||
expressions. You could, for example, force that the absolute value of
|
||||
\mzninline{a} is bigger than \mzninline{b} using the constraint
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{mzn}
|
||||
constraint if b >= 0 then a > b else b < a endif;
|
||||
\end{mzn}
|
||||
|
||||
In \minizinc\ the result of an \gls{conditional} expression is, however, not
|
||||
In \minizinc\ the result of a \gls{conditional} expression is, however, not
|
||||
contained to Boolean types. The condition in the expression, the ``if'', must be
|
||||
of a Boolean type, but as long as the different sides of the \gls{conditional}
|
||||
expression are the same type it is a valid conditional expression. This can be
|
||||
@ -300,9 +369,9 @@ used to, for example, define an absolute value function for integer
|
||||
|
||||
When the condition does not contain any \glspl{variable}, then the flattening of
|
||||
a \gls{conditional} expression will result in one of the side of the
|
||||
expressions. If, however, the condition does contain a \glspl{variable}, then
|
||||
the result of the condition cannot be defined during the flattening. Instead,
|
||||
the expression will introduce a new variable for the result of the expression
|
||||
expressions. If, however, the condition does contain a \gls{variable}, then the
|
||||
result of the condition cannot be defined during the flattening. Instead, the
|
||||
expression will introduce a new \gls{variable} for the result of the expression
|
||||
and a constraint to enforce the functional relationship. In \minizinc\ special
|
||||
\mzninline{if_then_else} \glspl{global} are available to implement this
|
||||
relationship.
|
||||
@ -322,7 +391,7 @@ referenced by expression.
|
||||
|
||||
\Gls{array} \glspl{comprehension} are expressions can be used to compose
|
||||
\gls{array} objects. This allows modellers to create \glspl{array} that are not
|
||||
given directly as input to the model or are a declared collection of variables.
|
||||
given directly as input to the model or are a declared collection of \glspl{variable}.
|
||||
|
||||
\Gls{generator} expressions, \mzninline{[E | G where F]}, consist of three
|
||||
parts:
|
||||
@ -336,19 +405,19 @@ parts:
|
||||
when the filtering condition succeeds.
|
||||
\end{description}
|
||||
|
||||
The following example composes a array that contains the doubled even values of
|
||||
The following example composes an \gls{array} that contains the doubled even values of
|
||||
an \gls{array} \mzninline{x}.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{minizinc}
|
||||
\begin{mzn}
|
||||
[ xi * 2 | xi in x where x mod 2 == 0]
|
||||
\end{minizinc}
|
||||
\end{mzn}
|
||||
|
||||
The evaluated expression will be added to the new array. This means that the
|
||||
type of the array will primarily depend on the type of the expression. However,
|
||||
in recent versions of \minizinc\ both the collections over which we iterate and
|
||||
the filtering condition could have a \gls{variable} type. Since we then cannot
|
||||
decise during flattening if an element is present in the array, the elements
|
||||
will be made of an \gls{optional} type. This means that the solver still will
|
||||
decide during flattening if an element is present in the array, the elements
|
||||
will be made of a \gls{optional} type. This means that the solver still will
|
||||
decide if the element is present in the array or if it takes a special
|
||||
``absent'' value (\mzninline{<>}).
|
||||
|
||||
@ -358,8 +427,8 @@ provide a list of definitions, flattened in order, that can be used in its
|
||||
resulting definition. There are three main purposes for \glspl{let}:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item To name an intermediate expression so it can be used multiple times (or
|
||||
to simplify the expression). For example, the constraint
|
||||
\item To name an intermediate expression, so it can be used multiple times or
|
||||
to simplify the expression. For example, the constraint
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{mzn}
|
||||
constraint let { var int: tmp = x div 2; } in tmp mod 2 == 0 \/ tmp = 0;
|
||||
@ -390,13 +459,14 @@ resulting definition. There are three main purposes for \glspl{let}:
|
||||
multiplication constraint \mzninline{pred_int_times}.
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
An important detail in flattening \glspl{let} is that any variables that are
|
||||
introduced might need to be renamed in the resulting solver level model.
|
||||
Different from top-level definitions, the variables declared in \glspl{let} can
|
||||
be flattened multiple times when used in loops, function definitions (that are
|
||||
called multiple times), and \gls{array} \glspl{comprehension}. In these cases the
|
||||
flattener must assign any variables in the \gls{let} a new name and use this
|
||||
name in any subsequent definitions and in the resulting expression.
|
||||
An important detail in flattening \glspl{let} is that any \glspl{variable} that
|
||||
are introduced might need to be renamed in the resulting solver level model.
|
||||
Different from top-level definitions, the \glspl{variable} declared in
|
||||
\glspl{let} can be flattened multiple times when used in loops, function
|
||||
definitions (that are called multiple times), and \gls{array}
|
||||
\glspl{comprehension}. In these cases the flattener must assign any
|
||||
\glspl{variable} in the \gls{let} a new name and use this name in any subsequent
|
||||
definitions and in the resulting expression.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Handling Undefined Expressions}%
|
||||
\label{subsec:back-mzn-partial}
|
||||
@ -408,7 +478,7 @@ Examples of such expressions in \minizinc\ are:
|
||||
\item Division (or modulus) when the divisor is zero: \\ \mzninline{x div 0 =
|
||||
@??@}
|
||||
|
||||
\item Array access when the index is outside of the given index set: \\
|
||||
\item Array access when the index is outside the given index set: \\
|
||||
\mzninline{array1d(1..3, [1,2,3])[0] = @??@}
|
||||
|
||||
\item Finding the minimum or maximum or an empty set: \\ \mzninline{min({})
|
||||
@ -419,7 +489,7 @@ Examples of such expressions in \minizinc\ are:
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
The existence of undefined expressions can cause confusion in \cmls. There is
|
||||
The existence of undefined expressions can cause confusion in \cmls{}. There is
|
||||
both the question of what happens when an undefined expression is evaluated and
|
||||
at what point during the process undefined values will be resolved, during
|
||||
flattening or at solving time.
|
||||
|
@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ modelling language throughout this thesis. This chapter offers a formal
|
||||
specification of the grammar of the current version \minizinc\ language,
|
||||
corresponding with \minizinc\ version 2.5.3.
|
||||
|
||||
For the convinience of the reader the grammar has been split into several parts.
|
||||
For the convenience of the reader the grammar has been split into several parts.
|
||||
\Cref{sec:mzn-grammar-items} shows the syntax for the top-level structure of a
|
||||
model. \Cref{sec:mzn-grammar-typeinst} shows the syntax of type expressions,
|
||||
used for variable declarations and return types of variables.
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user