Lazy Conflict Detection with Genetic Algorithms

  • Christoph UranEmail author
  • Alexander Felfernig
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10868)


The customization of complex products and services requires configurators with often large and complex knowledge bases. In the case that configuration-related user requirements are inconsistent with the knowledge base, immediate feedback is desired. However, due to the domain’s complexity, efficient feedback generation is often not possible. In this paper we show how to use genetic algorithms to pre-generate minimal conflict sets. Their integration into the configurator allows response times required for interactive settings. Our evaluations, based on knowledge bases from the air pollution monitoring domain, show significant performance improvements.


  1. 1.
    Carneiro, D., Novais, P., Neves, J.: Using genetic algorithms to create solutions for conflict resolution. Neurocomputing 109, 16–26 (2013). New trends on Soft Computing Models in Industrial and Environmental ApplicationsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Felfernig, A., Schubert, M., Zehentner, C.: An efficient diagnosis algorithm for inconsistent constraint sets. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 26(1), 53–62 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Felfernig, A., Falkner, A., Atas, M., Polat-Erdeniz, S., Uran, C., Azzoni, P.: ASP-based knowledge representations for IoT configuration scenarios. In: 19th International Configuration Workshop, p. 62 (2017)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Felfernig, A., Hotz, L., Bagley, C., Tiihonen, J.: Knowledge-Based Configuration: From Research to Business Cases, 1st edn. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fleischanderl, G., Friedrich, G.E., Haselbock, A., Schreiner, H., Stumptner, M.: Configuring large systems using generative constraint satisfaction. IEEE Intell. Syst. Appl. 13(4), 59–68 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Junker, U.: QUICKXPLAIN: preferred explanations and relaxations for over-constrained problems. In: Proceedings of the 19th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2004, pp. 167–172. AAAI Press (2004).
  7. 7.
    Man, K.F., Tang, K.S., Kwong, S.: Genetic algorithms: concepts and applications. IEEE Trans. Industr. Electron. 43(5), 519–534 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marra, M.A., Walcott, B.L.: Stability and optimality in genetic algorithm controllers. In: Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control, pp. 492–496, September 1996Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mitchell, M.: An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pu, P., Chen, L.: Trust building with explanation interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI 2006, pp. 93–100. ACM, New York (2006).
  12. 12.
    Reiter, R.: A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artif. Intell. 32(1), 57–95 (1987). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stumptner, M.: An overview of knowledge-based configuration. AI Commun. 10(2), 111–125 (1997). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Walter, R., Felfernig, A., Küchlin, W.: Constraint-based and SAT-based diagnosis of automotive configuration problems. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. (JIIS), 1–32 (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Whitley, D.: A genetic algorithm tutorial. Stat. Comput. 4(2), 65–85 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Software TechnologyGraz University of TechnologyGrazAustria
  2. 2.Faculty of Engineering and ITCarinthia University of Applied SciencesKlagenfurtAustria

Personalised recommendations