On benchmarking constraint logic programming platforms. Response to Fernández and Hill's ``A comparative study of eight constraint programming languages over the Boolean and finite domains

DOI10.1023/B:CONS.0000006181.40558.37MaRDI QIDQ704657zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors D. Kharzeev

Publication date 19 January 2005

Published in Constraints (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://doi.org/10.1023/b:cons.0000006181.40558.37

zbMATH Keywords

BenchmarkingCLPConstraint logic programmingECLiPSeFinite Domainsolver performanceUnit Testing

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Logic programming (68N17) Problem solving in the context of artificial intelligence (heuristics, search strategies, etc.) (68T20)

Recommendations

• A comparative study of eight constraint programming languages over the Boolean and finite domains
• Constraint satisfaction using constraint logic programming
• Finding the right hybrid algorithm -- a combinatorial meta-problem
• \(\text{ECL}^{\text{i}}\text{PS}^{\text{e}}\) -- from LP to CLP
• Some challenges for constraint programming

Cited in

(4)

• Evaluating ASP and commercial solvers on the CSPLib
• A comparative study of eight constraint programming languages over the Boolean and finite domains
• Towards a practical engineering tool for rostering
• An empirical study of constraint logic programming and answer set programming solutions of combinatorial problems

Describes a project that uses

Uses Software

• Oz

This page was built for publication: On benchmarking constraint logic programming platforms. Response to Fernández and Hill's ``A comparative study of eight constraint programming languages over the Boolean and finite domains

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q704657)