The constraint logic programming paradigm: declarativity, efficiency, and flexibility

  • U. Geske
  • H.-J. Goltz
  • U. John
  • A. Wolf
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT)


Real-world applications of theories for planning, scheduling, and design, call for more powerful and expressive theories than those provided by “classical” methods, which are based on a number of simplifying assumptions. Basic research on theories of constraint solving has made marked progress over the past few years. This paper sets out to show that the declarative nature of this new paradigm has significant advantages in software-engineering terms in the programming and maintenance phases. Moreover, the high efficiency of these methods allows the simulation of different strategies and supplies near-optimal solutions within a short time. However, complex problems require the application of heuristics. Research results in this area are presented.


Constraint logic programming optimization planning configuration 


  1. [BT95]
    BT Technl. J. Vol. 13, No. 1, Jan. 1995Google Scholar
  2. [Bau97]
    H. Baumgärtel. Constraint-based multi-criterial optimization for flow production planning. Proc. IMACS’97. Aug. 1997.Google Scholar
  3. [FGN96]
    A. Fordan, U. Geske, A. Nareyek. Optimizing Constraint-Intensive Problems Using Early Projection., Proc. JICSLP’96, The MIT Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. [Go195]
    H.-J. Goltz. Reducing domains for search in CLP(FD) and its application to job-shop scheduling. Proc. CP’95, Springer LNCS 976, pp. 549 – 562, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. [Hen89]
    P. Van Hentenryck. Constraint Satisfaction in Logic Program-ming. MIT Press, Cambridge (Mass.), London, 1989.Google Scholar
  6. [HR96]
    Walter Hower and Zsófia Ruttkay, editors. Non-Standard Con-straint Processing, ECAI-96 workshop W27, Budapest, 1996.Google Scholar
  7. [JL87]
    J. Jaffar and J.-L. Lassez. Constraint logic programming. In Proc. 14th Principles of Programming Languages, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [JM87]
    J. Jaffar and S. Michaylov. Methodology and implementation of a CLP system. In J.-L. Lassez (ed.), Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Logic Programming, pp. 196–218. MIT Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. [Jou94]
    J.-P. Jouannaud, editor. Constraints in Computational Logics, Springer-Verlag, Volume 845 of LNCS, 1994.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. [MR95]
    U. Montanari and F. Rossi, editors. Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming - CP’95, Springer-Verlag, Volume 976 of LNCS. 1995.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. [Pod95]
    A. Podelski, editor. Constraint Programming: Basics and Trends, Springer-Verlag, Volume 910 of LNCS, 1995.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [Tsa93]
    E. Tsang. Foundations of Constraint Satisfaction. Academic Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  13. [Wa196]
    M. Wallace. Practical applications of contraint programming. Constraints, An International Journal, 1: 139–168, 1996.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. [WB93]
    M.A. Wilson and A. Borning. Hierarchical constraint logic pro-gramming. The Journal of Logic Programming, 16(3&4) 1993.Google Scholar
  15. [Wo196]
    A. Wolf. Transforming ordered constraint hierarchies into ordi-nary constraint systems. In LNCS, Vol. 1106, 1996.Google Scholar
  16. [Wo197]
    A. Wolf. Solving hierarchies of finite-domain constraints. Journal on Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, Special issue on non-standard constraint processing, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • U. Geske
    • 1
  • H.-J. Goltz
    • 1
  • U. John
    • 1
  • A. Wolf
    • 1
  1. 1.GMD BerlinD-12489 BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations