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.0000006181.40558.37zbMATH Open1069.68034OpenAlexW1986753785MaRDI QIDQ704657FDOQ704657

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

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

zbMATH Keywords

BenchmarkingCLPConstraint logic programmingECLiPSeFinite Domainsolver performanceUnit Testing

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

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

Cited In (3)

• Towards a practical engineering tool for rostering
• Evaluating ASP and commercial solvers on the CSPLib
• An empirical study of constraint logic programming and answer set programming solutions of combinatorial problems

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)