Results 1  10
of
29
Which Problems Have Strongly Exponential Complexity?
 Journal of Computer and System Sciences
, 1998
"... For several NPcomplete problems, there have been a progression of better but still exponential algorithms. In this paper, we address the relative likelihood of subexponential algorithms for these problems. We introduce a generalized reduction which we call SubExponential Reduction Family (SERF) t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 132 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
For several NPcomplete problems, there have been a progression of better but still exponential algorithms. In this paper, we address the relative likelihood of subexponential algorithms for these problems. We introduce a generalized reduction which we call SubExponential Reduction Family (SERF) that preserves subexponential complexity. We show that CircuitSAT is SERFcomplete for all NPsearch problems, and that for any fixed k, kSAT, kColorability, kSet Cover, Independent Set, Clique, Vertex Cover, are SERFcomplete for the class SNP of search problems expressible by second order existential formulas whose first order part is universal. In particular, subexponential complexity for any one of the above problems implies the same for all others. We also look at the issue of proving strongly exponential lower bounds for AC 0 ; that is, bounds of the form 2 \Omega\Gamma n) . This problem is even open for depth3 circuits. In fact, such a bound for depth3 circuits with even l...
An Improved Exponentialtime Algorithm for kSAT
, 1998
"... We propose and analyze a simple new randomized algorithm, called ResolveSat, for finding satisfying assignments of Boolean formulas in conjunctive normal form. The algorithm consists of two stages: a preprocessing stage in which resolution is applied to enlarge the set of clauses of the formula, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 86 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We propose and analyze a simple new randomized algorithm, called ResolveSat, for finding satisfying assignments of Boolean formulas in conjunctive normal form. The algorithm consists of two stages: a preprocessing stage in which resolution is applied to enlarge the set of clauses of the formula, followed by a search stage that uses a simple randomized greedy procedure to look for a satisfying assignment. We show that, for each k, the running time of ResolveSat on a kCNF formula is significantly better than 2 n , even in the worst case. In particular, we show that the algorithm finds a satisfying assignment of a general satisfiable 3CNF in time O(2 :448n ) with high probability; where the best previous algorithm [13] has running time O(2 :562n ). We obtain a better upper bound of 2 (2 ln 2\Gamma1)n+o(n) = O(2 0:387n ) for 3CNF that have exactly one satisfying assignment (unique kSAT). For each k, the bounds for general kCNF are the best currently known for ...
New methods for 3SAT decision and worstcase analysis
 THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE
, 1999
"... We prove the worstcase upper bound 1:5045 n for the time complexity of 3SAT decision, where n is the number of variables in the input formula, introducing new methods for the analysis as well as new algorithmic techniques. We add new 2 and 3clauses, called "blocked clauses", generali ..."
Abstract

Cited by 69 (14 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We prove the worstcase upper bound 1:5045 n for the time complexity of 3SAT decision, where n is the number of variables in the input formula, introducing new methods for the analysis as well as new algorithmic techniques. We add new 2 and 3clauses, called "blocked clauses", generalizing the extension rule of "Extended Resolution." Our methods for estimating the size of trees lead to a refined measure of formula complexity of 3clausesets and can be applied also to arbitrary trees. Keywords: 3SAT, worstcase upper bounds, analysis of algorithms, Extended Resolution, blocked clauses, generalized autarkness. 1 Introduction In this paper we study the exponential part of time complexity for 3SAT decision and prove the worstcase upper bound 1:5044:: n for n the number of variables in the input formula, using new algorithmic methods as well as new methods for the analysis. These methods also deepen the already existing approaches in a systematically manner. The following results...
Satis¯ability coding lemma
 Chicago Journal of Theoretical Computer Science
, 1999
"... ..."
(Show Context)
Satisfiability Testing with More Reasoning and Less Guessing
, 1995
"... A new algorithm for testing satisfiability of propositional formulas in conjunctive normal form (CNF) is described. It applies reasoning in the form of certain resolution operations, and identification of equivalent literals. Resolution produces growth in the size of the formula, but within a global ..."
Abstract

Cited by 52 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A new algorithm for testing satisfiability of propositional formulas in conjunctive normal form (CNF) is described. It applies reasoning in the form of certain resolution operations, and identification of equivalent literals. Resolution produces growth in the size of the formula, but within a global quadratic bound; most previous methods avoid operations that produce any growth, and generally do not identify equivalent literals. Computational experience indicates that the method does substantially less "guessing" than previously reported algorithms, while keeping a polynomial time bound on the work done between guesses. Experiments indicate that, for larger problems, the time investment in reasoning returns a profit in reduced searching, and the profit increases with increasing problem size. Experimental data compares six branching strategies of the proposed algorithm on a variety of problems, including several Dimacs benchmarks. These branching strategies were shown to perform differently with statistical signi cance. A new scheme based on Johnson's maximum satisfiability approximation algorithm was found to be the best overall. Both satisfiable and unsatifi able random 3CNF formulas with 50283 variables and 4.27 ratio of clauses to variables have been tested; this class is generally acknowledged to be relatively "hard" and
On the Complexity of kSAT
, 2001
"... The kSAT problem is to determine if a given kCNF has a satisfying assignment. It is a celebrated open question as to whether it requires exponential time to solve kSAT for k 3. Here exponential time means 2 $n for some $>0. In this paper, assuming that, for k 3, kSAT requires exponential time ..."
Abstract

Cited by 45 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The kSAT problem is to determine if a given kCNF has a satisfying assignment. It is a celebrated open question as to whether it requires exponential time to solve kSAT for k 3. Here exponential time means 2 $n for some $>0. In this paper, assuming that, for k 3, kSAT requires exponential time complexity, we show that the complexity of kSAT increases as k increases. More precisely, for k 3, define s k=inf[$: there exists 2 $n algorithm for solving kSAT]. Define ETH (ExponentialTime Hypothesis) for kSAT as follows: for k 3, s k>0. In this paper, we show that s k is increasing infinitely often assuming ETH for kSAT. Let s be the limit of s k. We will in fact show that s k (1&d k) s for some constant d>0. We prove this result by bringing together the ideas of critical clauses and the Sparsification Lemma to reduce the satisfiability of a kCNF to the satisfiability of a disjunction of 2 =n k$CNFs in fewer variables for some k $ k and arbitrarily small =>0. We also show that such a disjunction can be computed in time 2 =n for arbitrarily small =>0.
Improved Algorithms for 3Coloring, 3EdgeColoring, and Constraint Satisfaction
, 2001
"... We consider worst case time bounds for NPcomplete problems including 3SAT, 3coloring, 3edgecoloring, and 3list coloring. Our algorithms are based on a constraint satisfaction (CSP) formulation of these problems; 3SAT is equivalent to (2, 3)CSP while the other problems above are special cases ..."
Abstract

Cited by 45 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We consider worst case time bounds for NPcomplete problems including 3SAT, 3coloring, 3edgecoloring, and 3list coloring. Our algorithms are based on a constraint satisfaction (CSP) formulation of these problems; 3SAT is equivalent to (2, 3)CSP while the other problems above are special cases of (3, 2)CSP. We give a fast algorithm for (3, 2) CSP and use it to improve the time bounds for solving the other problems listed above. Our techniques involve a mixture of DavisPutnamstyle backtracking with more sophisticated matching and network flow based ideas.
Deciding propositional tautologies: Algorithms and their complexity
, 1997
"... We investigate polynomial reductions and efficient branching rules for algorithms deciding propositional tautologies for DNF and coNPcomplete subclasses. Upper bounds on the time complexity are given with exponential part 2 ff\Delta(F ) where (F ) is one of the measures n(F ) = #f variables g, ` ..."
Abstract

Cited by 36 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We investigate polynomial reductions and efficient branching rules for algorithms deciding propositional tautologies for DNF and coNPcomplete subclasses. Upper bounds on the time complexity are given with exponential part 2 ff\Delta(F ) where (F ) is one of the measures n(F ) = #f variables g, `(F ) = #f literal occurrences g and k(F ) = #f clauses g. We start with a discussion of variants of the algorithms from [Monien/Speckenmeyer85] and [Luckhardt84] with the known upper bound 2 0:695\Deltan for 3DNF and (roughly) (2 \Delta (1 \Gamma 2 \Gammap )) n for pDNF, p 3, where p is the maximal clause length, giving now an uniform treatment for all pDNF including the easy decidable case p 2. Recently for 3DNF the bound has been lowered to 2 0:5892\Deltan ([K2]; see also [Sch2], [K3]). In this article further improvements are achieved by studying two additional characteristic groups of parameters. The first group differentiates according to the maximal numbers (a; b) of occ...
Worstcase Analysis, 3SAT Decision and Lower Bounds: Approaches for Improved SAT Algorithms
"... . New methods for worstcase analysis and (3)SAT decision are presented. The focus lies on the central ideas leading to the improved bound 1:5045 n for 3SAT decision ([Ku96]; n is the number of variables). The implications for SAT decision in general are discussed and elucidated by a number of h ..."
Abstract

Cited by 21 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. New methods for worstcase analysis and (3)SAT decision are presented. The focus lies on the central ideas leading to the improved bound 1:5045 n for 3SAT decision ([Ku96]; n is the number of variables). The implications for SAT decision in general are discussed and elucidated by a number of hypothesis'. In addition an exponential lower bound for a general class of SATalgorithms is given and the only possibilities to remain under this bound are pointed out. In this article the central ideas leading to the improved worstcase upper bound 1:5045 n for 3SAT decision ([Ku96]) are presented. 1) In nine sections the following subjects are treated: 1. "Gauging of branchings": The " function" and the concept of a "distance function" is introduced, our main tools for the analysis of SAT algorithms, and, as we propose, also a basis for (complete) practical algorithms. 2. "Estimating the size of arbitrary trees": The " Lemma" is presented, yielding an upper bound for the number of l...
Two new upper bounds for SAT
, 1998
"... In 1980 B. Monien and E. Speckenmeyer proved that satisfiability of a propositional formula consisting of K clauses can be checked in time of the order 2^{K/3}. Recently O. Kullmann and H. Luckhardt proved the bound 2^{L/9}, where L is the length of the input formula. The algorithms leading to these ..."
Abstract

Cited by 20 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In 1980 B. Monien and E. Speckenmeyer proved that satisfiability of a propositional formula consisting of K clauses can be checked in time of the order 2^{K/3}. Recently O. Kullmann and H. Luckhardt proved the bound 2^{L/9}, where L is the length of the input formula. The algorithms leading to these bounds (like many other SAT algorithms) are based on splitting, i.e., they reduce SAT for a formula F to SAT for several simpler formulas F1 , F2 , ... , Fm . These algorithms simplify each of F1 , F2 , ... , Fm according to some transformation rules such as the elimination of pure literals, the unit propagation rule etc. In this paper we present a new transformation rule and two algorithms using this rule. These algorithms have the bounds 2^{0.30897K} and 2^{0.10537L}, respectively.