Show that CSP generalizes SAT formulating the following SAT problem as a CSP:
Show how an arbitrary (non-binary) CSP can be polynomially converted into an equivalent binary CSP.
Given two CSP, $\cal P$ and $\cal P’$, we write ${\cal P’} \preceq {\cal P}$ iff any instantiation $I$ on $Y \subseteq X_{\cal P}$ locally inconsistent in $\cal P$ is locally inconsistent in $\cal P’$ as well.
Consider the following CSP:
.
Construct two domain tightenings $\mathcal{P}_1$ and ${\cal P}_2$ of $\cal P$ (a domain tightening is $\cal P’$ such that $X_{\cal P’}=X_{\cal P}$, ${\cal DE}’ \subseteq {\cal DE}, {\cal C}_{\cal P’}={\cal C}_{\cal P}$) for which the relation $\preceq$ defined above is in fact a partial order. (Assume ${\cal C}$ admits any combination of values as valid.)
Are the two following CSPs arc consistent?
$\langle \{x=1,y\in\{0,1\},z\in\{0,1\}\}; x \wedge y = z;\rangle$
$\langle \{x\in\{0,1\},y\in\{0,1\},z=1\}; x \wedge y = z;\rangle$
Consider the $n$-queens problem with $n\geq 3$ and its formulation as a binary CSP that uses the least variables (that is, $n$ variables that indicate the position of the queens, say, on the columns). Is the initial status of this CSP problem arc consistent? If not, enforce arc consistency.
Consider an initial domain expression $\{x \in \{0, 1, 2, 3\}, y \in \{0, 1, 2, 3\}\}$ and two constraints $x < y$ and $y < x$. Apply the propagation algorithm Revise2001 from the lecture using pen and paper.
A form of weaker arc consistency is directed arc consistency, which enforces consistency only in one direction. Decide if the following CSP $\langle x \in [2..10], y\in [3..7], x<y\rangle$ is directed arc consistent in the case of linear ordering $y \prec x$ and in the case $x \prec y$.
Consider the crossword grid
and suppose we are to fill it with the words taken from the following list:
Formulate the problem as a CSP.
Is the initial status of the formulated CSP arc consistent? If not, enforce arc consistency.