EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Steven D. Prestwich
dblp:56/661 · also Steve Prestwich, Steven David Prestwich
· DBLP profile ↗
42ranked-venue papers
25as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-6218-9158ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 36 · 22 first-author · 3 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 13 · 8 first-authorTheory of computation · 8 · 7 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 6 · 4 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 3 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Computer networks · 1 · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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.
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Cloud and datacenter computing · 56% Energy-efficient computing · 44% | |
| Artificial intelligence
4 papers |
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 51% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 32% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 17% | |
| Theoretical computer science
3 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 43% Computational complexity · 32% Logic in computer science · 16% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100% |
Topics — the 14 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Energy-efficient computing
energy management |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Performance and Energy Savings Trade-Off with Uncertainty-Aware Cloud Workload Forecasting · ICNP 2023 |
Cloud and datacenter computing
workload prediction |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Performance and Energy Savings Trade-Off with Uncertainty-Aware Cloud Workload Forecasting · ICNP 2023 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
constraint programming |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Confidence-based reasoning in stochastic constraint programming · Artif. Intell. 2015 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › constraint programming
stochastic constraint programming |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Confidence-based reasoning in stochastic constraint programming · Artif. Intell. 2015 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
uncertainty reasoning |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Confidence-based reasoning in stochastic constraint programming · Artif. Intell. 2015 |
Cloud and datacenter computing › cloud service management
service level agreement |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Performance and Energy Savings Trade-Off with Uncertainty-Aware Cloud Workload Forecasting · ICNP 2023 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein design
computational protein design |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Computational protein design as an optimization problem · Artif. Intell. 2014 |
Mathematical optimization
combinatorial optimization |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Computational protein design as an optimization problem · Artif. Intell. 2014 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
data filtering |
0.1 | 1 | 2012 | Filtering algorithms for global chance constraints · Artif. Intell. 2012 |
Logic in computer science
proof theory |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Refutation by Randomised General Resolution · AAAI 2007 |
Computational complexity › proof complexity
refutation |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Refutation by Randomised General Resolution · AAAI 2007 |
Computational complexity › proof complexity
resolution |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Refutation by Randomised General Resolution · AAAI 2007 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › nonmonotonic reasoning › preference handling
preference reasoning |
0.1 | 1 | 2005 | Constraint-Based Preferential Optimization · AAAI 2005 |
Approximation and online algorithms › approximation algorithms › randomized approximation
sampling-based approximation |
0.0 | 1 | 2011 | Finding (α, ϑ)-Solutions via Sampled SCSPs · IJCAI 2011 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
uncertainty quantification · 0.7combinatorial optimization · 0.4sampling · 0.2stochastic constraint satisfaction · 0.2confidence intervals · 0.2randomised general resolution · 0.1constraint-based optimization · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | A Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning-Based Framework for Forecasting Terrorist Collaboration and Predicting Future Alliances
Vedat Dogan, Steven D. Prestwich, Barry O'Sullivan |
ASONAM (2) | 2 |
| 2024 | A statistical approach to learning constraintsabstractA constraint-based model represents knowledge about a domain by a set of constraints, which must be satisfied by solutions in that domain. These models may be used for reasoning, decision making and optimisation. Unfortunately, modelling itself is a hard and error-prone task that requires expertise. The automation of this process is often referred to as constraint acquisition and has been pursued for over 20 years. Methods typically learn constraints by testing candidates against a dataset of solutions and non-solutions, and often use some form of machine learning to decide which should be learned. However, few methods are robust under errors in the data, some cannot handle large sets of candidates, and most are computationally expensive even for small problems. We describe a statistical approach based on sequential analysis that is robust, fast and scalable to large biases. Its correctness depends on an assumption that does not always hold but which is, we show using Bayesian analysis , reasonable in practice. Steven D. Prestwich, Nic Wilson |
Int. J. Approx. Reason. | 1 |
| 2023 | Performance and Energy Savings Trade-Off with Uncertainty-Aware Cloud Workload ForecastingabstractCloud computing has seen widespread adoption because it increases the productivity and efficiency of industries and allows for effective scalability of their business [1]. Guaranteeing performance levels is at the core of cloud services and requires huge computational resources, especially with the latest advances in technologies such as Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things [2]. Typically, customers subscribe to agreements where cloud providers ensure specific levels of reliability, availability and responsiveness to systems and applications and describe penalties if the service levels are not met. At the same time, massive computational resources are a cost for providers and have a significant environmental impact, which will increase in the future. It is estimated that the energy consumption of data centres (which host cloud services) will grow from 292 TWh in 2016 to 353 TWh in 2030 [3], and greenhouse gas emissions will increase over 14% in 2040, compared to a 1-1.6% increase in the 2007–2016 [4]. Diego Carraro, Andrea Rossi 0010, Andrea Visentin, Steven D. Prestwich, Kenneth N. Brown |
ICNP | 4 |
| 2022 | Bayesian Uncertainty Modelling for Cloud Workload PredictionabstractProviders of cloud computing systems need to manage resources carefully to meet the desired Quality of Service and reduce waste due to overallocation. An accurate prediction of future demand is crucial to allocate resources to service requests without excessive delays. Current state-of-the-art methods such as Long Short-Term Memory-based models make only point forecasts of demand without considering the uncertainty in their predictions. Forecasting a distribution would provide a more comprehensive picture and inform resource scheduler decisions. We investigate Bayesian Neural Networks and deep learning models to predict workload distribution and evaluate them on the time series forecasting of CPU and memory workload of 8 clusters on the Google Cloud data centre. Experiments show that the proposed models provide accurate demand prediction and better estimations of resource usage bounds, reducing overprediction and total predicted resources, while avoiding underprediction. These approaches have good runtime performance making them applicable for practitioners. Andrea Rossi 0010, Andrea Visentin, Steven D. Prestwich, Kenneth N. Brown |
CLOUD | 3 |
| 2021 | Unsupervised Constraint AcquisitionabstractConstraint programming has been successfully used to model and solve problems in many domains, but its application can require significant expertise. This is sometimes called a modelling bottleneck, and the aim of constraint acquisition (CA) is to remove the bottleneck by automating constraint modelling. Current CA methods use forms of supervised learning: they learn constraints from a dataset of known solutions and (usually) non-solutions. Unfortunately this incurs a data collection bottleneck, as preparing such a dataset requires human effort. Removing this bottleneck might lead to the full automation of CA, for example allowing the use of data scraped from the Web without human intervention. In this paper we propose an unsupervised CA method inspired by data mining techniques, and show that it can learn several CA benchmarks. We also show that it has additional useful properties: it is robust under data errors, can learn from non-solutions only, and can learn over-constrained models. Steven D. Prestwich |
ICTAI | 1 |
| 2020 | Robust Constraint Acquisition by Sequential AnalysisabstractModeling a combinatorial problem is a hard and error-prone task requiring expertise.Constraint acquisition methods can automate this process by learning constraints from examples of solutions and (usually) non-solutions.We describe a new statistical approach based on sequential analysis that is orders of magnitude faster than existing methods, and gives accurate results on popular benchmarks.It is also robust in the sense that it can learn constraints correctly even when the data contain many errors. Steven D. Prestwich |
ECAI | 1 |
| 2016 | Robust Principal Component Analysis by Reverse Iterative Linear Programming
Andrea Visentin, Steven D. Prestwich, Armagan Tarim |
ECML/PKDD (2) | 2 |
| 2015 | Randomness as a Constraint
Steven D. Prestwich, Roberto Rossi 0002, Armagan Tarim |
CP | 1 |
| 2015 | Solving a Hard Cutting Stock Problem by Machine Learning and Optimisation
Steven D. Prestwich, Adejuyigbe O. Fajemisin, Laura Climent, Barry O'Sullivan |
ECML/PKDD (1) | 1 |
| 2015 | Confidence-based reasoning in stochastic constraint programming
Roberto Rossi 0002, Brahim Hnich, Armagan Tarim, Steven D. Prestwich |
Artif. Intell. | 4 |
| 2014 | Symmetry Breaking for Exact Solutions in Adjustable Robust OptimisationabstractOne of the key unresolved challenges in Adjustable Robust Optimisation is how to deal with large discrete uncertainty sets. In this paper we present a technique for handling such sets based on symmetry breaking ideas from Constraint Programming. In earlier work we applied the technique to a pre-disaster planning problem modelled as a two-stage Stochastic Program, and we were able to solve exactly instances that were previously considered intractable and only had approximate solutions. In this paper we show that the technique can also be applied to an adjustable robust formulation that scales up to larger instances than the stochastic formulation. We also describe a new fast symmetry breaking heuristic that gives improved results. Steven D. Prestwich, Marco Laumanns, Ban Kawas |
ECAI | 1 |
| 2014 | Statistical ConstraintsabstractWe introduce statistical constraints, a declarative modelling tool that links statistics and constraint programming. We discuss two statistical constraints and some associated filtering algorithms. Finally, we illustrate applications to standard problems encountered in statistics and to a novel inspection scheduling problem in which the aim is to find inspection plans with desirable statistical properties. Roberto Rossi 0002, Steven D. Prestwich, Armagan Tarim |
ECAI | 2 |
| 2014 | Online Stochastic Planning for Taxi and RidesharingabstractIn this paper we consider the problem of on-line stochastic ride-sharing and taxi-sharing with time windows. We study a scenario in which people needing a taxi, or a ride, assign their source and destination points plus other restrictions (such as earlier time to departure and maximum time to reach a destination), at the same time, there are taxis or drivers interested in providing a ride (also with departure and destination points, vehicle capacity and time restrictions). We model the time window restrictions as a soft constraint (a reasonable delay might be acceptable in a realistic scenario), and consider the problem as an on-line continual planning problem, in which additional ride requests may arrive while plans for previous ride-matching are being executed. Finally, such new requests may arrive at each time step with some probability. The aim is to maximize the shared trips while minimising the expected travel delay for each trip. In this paper we propose an on-line stochastic optimization planning approach in which instead of myopically optimising for the offered trips and requested trips that are known, incorporate information that partially describes the stochastic future into the model in order to improve the quality of the solution. We prove the effectiveness of the method in a real world scenario using a number of instances extracted from a travel survey in north-eastern Illinois (USA) conducted by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. Carlo Manna, Steven D. Prestwich |
ICTAI | 2 |
| 2014 | Computational protein design as an optimization problem
David Allouche, Isabelle André, Sophie Barbe, Jessica Davies 0001, Simon de Givry, George Katsirelos, Barry O'Sullivan, Steven D. Prestwich, Thomas Schiex, Seydou Traoré |
Artif. Intell. | 8 |
| 2013 | Dead-End Elimination for Weighted CSP
Simon de Givry, Steven D. Prestwich, Barry O'Sullivan |
CP | 2 |
| 2013 | Value Interchangeability in Scenario Generation
Steven D. Prestwich, Marco Laumanns, Ban Kawas |
CP | 1 |
| 2012 | Filtering algorithms for global chance constraints
Brahim Hnich, Roberto Rossi 0002, Armagan Tarim, Steven D. Prestwich |
Artif. Intell. | 4 |
| 2011 | Finding (α, ϑ)-Solutions via Sampled SCSPs
Roberto Rossi 0002, Brahim Hnich, Armagan Tarim, Steven D. Prestwich |
IJCAI | 4 |
| 2010 | Stochastic Constraint Programming by Neuroevolution with Filtering
Steven D. Prestwich, Armagan Tarim, Roberto Rossi 0002, Brahim Hnich |
CPAIOR | 1 |
| 2009 | Synthesizing Filtering Algorithms for Global Chance-Constraints
Brahim Hnich, Roberto Rossi 0002, Armagan Tarim, Steven D. Prestwich |
CP | 4 |
| 2009 | Evolving Parameterised Policies for Stochastic Constraint Programming
Steven D. Prestwich, Armagan Tarim, Roberto Rossi 0002, Brahim Hnich |
CP | 1 |
| 2008 | Cost-Based Domain Filtering for Stochastic Constraint Programming
Roberto Rossi 0002, Armagan Tarim, Brahim Hnich, Steven D. Prestwich |
CP | 4 |
| 2008 | A Steady-State Genetic Algorithm with Resampling for Noisy Inventory Control
Steven D. Prestwich, Armagan Tarim, Roberto Rossi 0002, Brahim Hnich |
PPSN | 1 |
| 2008 | Generalised graph colouring by a hybrid of local search and constraint programming
Steven D. Prestwich |
Discret. Appl. Math. | 1 |
| 2007 | Refutation by Randomised General Resolution
Steven D. Prestwich, Inês Lynce |
AAAI | 1 |
| 2007 | Replenishment Planning for Stochastic Inventory Systems with Shortage Cost
Roberto Rossi 0002, Armagan Tarim, Brahim Hnich, Steven D. Prestwich |
CPAIOR | 4 |
| 2007 | Variable Dependency in Local Search: Prevention Is Better Than Cure
Steven D. Prestwich |
SAT | 1 |
| 2006 | Event-Driven Probabilistic Constraint Programming
Armagan Tarim, Brahim Hnich, Steven D. Prestwich |
CPAIOR | 3 |
| 2006 | Local Search for Unsatisfiability
Steven D. Prestwich, Inês Lynce |
SAT | 1 |
| 2005 | Constraint-Based Preferential Optimization
Steven D. Prestwich, Francesca Rossi 0001, K. Brent Venable, Toby Walsh |
AAAI | 1 |
| 2005 | Bounds-Consistent Local Search
Stefania Verachi, Steven D. Prestwich |
CP | 2 |
| 2005 | Symmetry Breaking and Local Search Spaces
Steven D. Prestwich, Andrea Roli |
CPAIOR | 1 |
| 2005 | Random Walk with Continuously Smoothed Variable Weights
Steven D. Prestwich |
SAT | 1 |
| 2004 | Full Dynamic Substitutability by SAT Encoding
Steven D. Prestwich |
CP | 1 |
| 2004 | Local Search for Very Large SAT Problems
Steven D. Prestwich, Colin Quirke |
SAT | 1 |
| 2003 | A SAT-Based Approach to Multiple Sequence Alignment
Steven D. Prestwich, Desmond G. Higgins, Orla O'Sullivan |
CP | 1 |
| 2003 | Local Search on SAT-encoded Colouring Problems
Steven D. Prestwich |
SAT | 1 |
| 2003 | SAT problems with chains of dependent variables
Steven D. Prestwich |
Discret. Appl. Math. | 1 |
| 2000 | A Hybrid Search Architecture Applied to Hard Random 3-SAT and Low-Autocorrelation Binary Sequences
Steven D. Prestwich |
CP | 1 |
| 1995 | Improved Branch and Bound in Constraint Logic Programming
Steven D. Prestwich, Shyam Mudambi |
CP | 1 |
| 1993 | Online Partial Deduction of Large ProgramsabstractPartial deduction systems must be guided by an unfolding strategy, telling them which atoms to unfold and when to stop unfolding. Online strategies exploit knowledge accumulated during the unfolding itself, for example in a goal stack, while offline strategies are fixed before unfolding begins. Online strategies are more powerful, but a major overhead for large programs is the analysis time spent on each atom, which increases as the knowledge grows. We describe an online strategy whose analysis time for each atom is independent of the amount of knowledge about that atom. This reduces transformation times for programs with large search spaces by an order of magnitude, while retaining the power of online analysis. Correctness, termination and nontriviality are shown. Steven D. Prestwich |
PEPM | 1 |
| 1990 | Top-down Synthesis of Recursive Logic Procedures from First-order Logic Specifications
Kung-Kiu Lau, Steven D. Prestwich |
ICLP | 2 |