Talk:Constraint satisfaction problem

Support keeping separate articles + cleanup and expansion

After giving this some thought, I support keeping the articles separate.

But the cleanup and hopefull expansion could include expansion of the constraint satisfaction problem page, and simplification of the constraint satisfaction article's explanation of formal algorithms. That other page is written in a way that is most accessible to the general reader not familiar with technical detail on either the subject or methods similar to those use in CSP programming and should remain generally accessible without going into great detail of solutions of CSP problems -- precisely where references to the constraint satisfaction problem or other more techical pages should be made.

Then the constraint satisfaction problem page should expand on algorithms and methods based on tree search and other methods, with links to individual algorithms by name.

My time is limited at this point, but in the next year I will see what I can do. Especially the constraint satisfaction problem page should be expanded to include more algorithms and history. I repeated part of this note from edited form on constraint satisfaction page.

Csp-interest (talk) 03:49, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Simpler formulation of the problem

Is it really necessary to treat "respective domain of values" D and "set of constraints" C separately, because "respective domains of values" seem to be just constraints involving a single variable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikko.nummelin (talk • contribs) 18:06, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

This is standard usage in most of the literature. Ott2 (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Ambiguous initialism 'DCSP'

The initialism 'DCSP' is ambiguous. The article uses it as shorthand for both "Decentralized" CSPs and "Dynamic" CSPs. Two questions arise:

1. Does this reflect current practice in the literature?
2. How not to confuse our readers? More specifically, should we:

• note that current practice is ambiguous; or alternatively,
• avoid the conflict by spelling out one of the two?

yoyo (talk) 15:17, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Constraint satisfaction problem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090206055207/http://www.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~ianm/docs/Thesis.ppt to http://www.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~ianm/docs/Thesis.ppt
• Added {{dead link}} tag to https://eprints.kfupm.edu.sa/50799/1/50799.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:34, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Clarification in formal definition

Shouldn't the constraints $t_{j}\subset X$ in the formal definition be ordered subsets of $X$? If not, what does it mean that the values assigned to the variables satisfy the relation $R_{j}$. Relations are sets of ordered tuples.

155.230.154.31 (talk) 03:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

"Feder-Vardi conjecture" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Feder-Vardi conjecture has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 26 § Feder-Vardi conjecture until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 21:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)