Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Daniël Fokkinga
dblp:312/9727
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0001-8507-6570ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
constraint programming |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Exact stochastic constraint optimisation with applications in network analysis · Artif. Intell. 2022 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › constraint optimization
stochastic constraint optimization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Exact stochastic constraint optimisation with applications in network analysis · Artif. Intell. 2022 |
Mathematical optimization › discrete optimization
mixed integer linear programming |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Exact stochastic constraint optimisation with applications in network analysis · Artif. Intell. 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
programming by optimisation · 1.1ordered binary decision diagrams · 1.1knowledge compilation · 1.1algorithm configuration · 1.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Exact stochastic constraint optimisation with applications in network analysisabstractWe present an extensive study of methods for exactly solving stochastic constraint (optimisation) problems (SCPs) in network analysis. These problems are prevalent in science, governance and industry. The first method we study is generic and decomposes stochastic constraints into a multitude of smaller local constraints that are solved using a constraint programming (CP) or mixed-integer programming (MIP) solver. However, many SCPs are formulated on probability distributions with a monotonic property, meaning that adding a positive decision to a partial solution to the problem cannot cause a decrease in solution quality. The second method is specifically designed for solving global stochastic constraints on monotonic probability distributions (SCMDs) in CP. Both methods use knowledge compilation to obtain a decision diagram encoding of the relevant probability distributions, where we focus on ordered binary decision diagrams (OBDDs). We discuss theoretical advantages and disadvantages of these methods and evaluate them experimentally. We observed that global approaches to solving SCMDs outperform decomposition approaches from CP, and perform complementarily to MIP-based decomposition approaches, while scaling much more favourably with instance size. Both methods have many alternative design choices, as both knowledge compilation and constraint solvers are used in a single pipeline. To identify which configurations work best, we apply programming by optimisation. Specifically, we show how an automated algorithm configurator can be used to find optimised configurations of our pipeline. After configuration, our global SCMD solving pipeline outperforms its closest competitor (a MIP-based decomposition pipeline) on all test sets we considered by up to two orders of magnitude in terms of PAR10 scores. Anna L. D. Latour, Behrouz Babaki, Daniël Fokkinga, Marie Anastacio, Holger H. Hoos, Siegfried Nijssen |
Artif. Intell. | 3 |