Search for: All records

Regular resolution is a refinement of the resolution proof system requiring that no variable be resolved on more than once along any path in the proof. It is known that there exist sequences of formulas that require exponential-size proofs in regular resolution while admitting polynomial-size proofs in resolution. Thus, with respect to the usual notion of simulation, regular resolution is separated from resolution. An alternative, and weaker, notion for comparing proof systems is that of an “effective simulation,” which allows the translation of the formula along with the proof when moving between proof systems. We prove that regular resolution is equivalent to resolution under effective simulations. As a corollary, we recover in a black-box fashion a recent result on the hardness of automating regular resolution. 

We study propositional proof systems with inference rules that formalize restricted versions of the ability to make assumptions that hold without loss of generality, commonly used informally to shorten proofs. Each system we study is built on resolution. They are called BC⁻, RAT⁻, SBC⁻, and GER⁻, denoting respectively blocked clauses, resolution asymmetric tautologies, set-blocked clauses, and generalized extended resolution - all without new variables. They may be viewed as weak versions of extended resolution (ER) since they are defined by first generalizing the extension rule and then taking away the ability to introduce new variables. Except for SBC⁻, they are known to be strictly between resolution and extended resolution. Several separations between these systems were proved earlier by exploiting the fact that they effectively simulate ER. We answer the questions left open: We prove exponential lower bounds for SBC⁻ proofs of a binary encoding of the pigeonhole principle, which separates ER from SBC⁻. Using this new separation, we prove that both RAT⁻ and GER⁻ are exponentially separated from SBC⁻. This completes the picture of their relative strengths. 

Radio 2-colorings of graphs are a generalization of vertex colorings motivated by the problem of assigning frequency channels in radio networks. In a radio 2-coloring of a graph, vertices are assigned integer colors so that the color of two vertices u and v differ by at least 2 if u and v are neighbors, and by at least 1 if u and v have a common neighbor. Our work improves the best-known bounds for optimal radio 2-colorings of small hypercube graphs, a combinatorial problem that has received significant attention in the past. We do so by using automated reasoning techniques such as symmetry breaking and Cube and Conquer, obtaining that for n = 7 and n = 8, the coding-theory upper bounds of Whittlesey et al. (1995) are not tight. Moreover, we prove the answer for n = 7 to be either 12 or 13, thus making a substantial step towards answering an open problem by Knuth (2015). Finally, we include several combinatorial observations that might be useful for further progress, while also arguing that fully determining the answer for n = 7 will require new techniques. 

Optimized SAT solvers not only preprocess the clause set, they also transform it during solving as inprocessing. Some preprocessing techniques have been generalized to first-order logic with equality. In this article, we port inprocessing techniques to work with superposition, a leading first-order proof calculus, and we strengthen known preprocessing techniques. Specifically, we look into elimination of hidden literals, variables (predicates), and blocked clauses. Our evaluation using the Zipperposition prover confirms that the new techniques usefully supplement the existing superposition machinery. 

We study the complexity of proof systems augmenting resolution with inference rules that allow, given a formula Γ in conjunctive normal form, deriving clauses that are not necessarily logically implied by Γ but whose addition to Γ preserves satisfiability. When the derived clauses are allowed to introduce variables not occurring in Γ, the systems we consider become equivalent to extended resolution. We are concerned with the versions of these systems without new variables. They are called BC⁻, RAT⁻, SBC⁻, and GER⁻, denoting respectively blocked clauses, resolution asymmetric tautologies, set-blocked clauses, and generalized extended resolution. Each of these systems formalizes some restricted version of the ability to make assumptions that hold --- without loss of generality --- which is commonly used informally to simplify or shorten proofs. Except for SBC⁻, these systems are known to be exponentially weaker than extended resolution. They are, however, all equivalent to it under a relaxed notion of simulation that allows the translation of the formula along with the proof when moving between proof systems. By taking advantage of this fact, we construct formulas that separate RAT⁻ from GER⁻ and vice versa. With the same strategy, we also separate SBC⁻ from RAT⁻. Additionally, we give polynomial-size SBC⁻ proofs of the pigeonhole principle, which separates SBC⁻ from GER⁻ by a previously known lower bound. These results also separate the three systems from BC⁻ since they all simulate it. We thus give an almost complete picture of their relative strengths. 

Extended resolution shows that auxiliary variables are very powerful in theory. However, attempts to exploit this potential in practice have had limited success. One reasonably effective method in this regard is bounded variable addition (BVA), which automatically reencodes formulas by introducing new variables and eliminating clauses, often significantly reducing formula size. We find motivating examples suggesting that the performance improvement caused by BVA stems not only from this size reduction but also from the introduction of effective auxiliary variables. Analyzing specific packing-coloring instances, we discover that BVA is fragile with respect to formula randomization, relying on variable order to break ties. With this understanding, we augment BVA with a heuristic for breaking ties in a structured way. We evaluate our new preprocessing technique, Structured BVA (SBVA), on more than 29 000 formulas from previous SAT competitions and show that it is robust to randomization. In a simulated competition setting, our implementation outperforms BVA on both randomized and original formulas, and appears to be well-suited for certain families of formulas.