{"title":"基于 CDCL 的 QBF 求解中的依赖方案:证明理论研究","authors":"Abhimanyu Choudhury, M. Mahajan","doi":"10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2023.38","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Quantified Boolean Formulas QBFs, dependency schemes help to detect spurious or superfluous dependencies that are implied by the variable ordering in the quantifier prefix but are not essential for constructing countermodels. This detection can provably shorten refutations in specific proof systems, and is expected to speed up runs of QBF solvers. The proof system $$\\texttt{QCDCL}$$\n QCDCL\n recently defined by Beyersdorff and Boehm (LMCS 2023) abstracts the reasoning employed by QBF solvers based on conflict-driven clause-learning (CDCL) techniques. We show how to incorporate the use of dependency schemes into this proof system, either in a preprocessing phase, or in the propagations and clause learning, or both. We then show that when the reflexive resolution path dependency scheme $$\\texttt{D}^{\\texttt{rrs}}$$\n \n D\n rrs\n \n is used, a mixed picture emerges: the proof systems that add $$\\texttt{D}^{\\texttt{rrs}}$$\n \n D\n rrs\n \n to $$\\texttt{QCDCL}$$\n QCDCL\n in these three ways are not only incomparable with each other, but are also incomparable with the basic $$\\texttt{QCDCL}$$\n QCDCL\n proof system that does not use $$\\texttt{D}^{\\texttt{rrs}}$$\n \n D\n rrs\n \n at all, as well as with several other resolution-based QBF proof systems. A notable fact is that all our separations are achieved through QBFs with bounded quantifier alternation.","PeriodicalId":11639,"journal":{"name":"Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex.","volume":"69 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dependency schemes in CDCL-based QBF solving: a proof-theoretic study\",\"authors\":\"Abhimanyu Choudhury, M. Mahajan\",\"doi\":\"10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2023.38\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Quantified Boolean Formulas QBFs, dependency schemes help to detect spurious or superfluous dependencies that are implied by the variable ordering in the quantifier prefix but are not essential for constructing countermodels. This detection can provably shorten refutations in specific proof systems, and is expected to speed up runs of QBF solvers. The proof system $$\\\\texttt{QCDCL}$$\\n QCDCL\\n recently defined by Beyersdorff and Boehm (LMCS 2023) abstracts the reasoning employed by QBF solvers based on conflict-driven clause-learning (CDCL) techniques. We show how to incorporate the use of dependency schemes into this proof system, either in a preprocessing phase, or in the propagations and clause learning, or both. We then show that when the reflexive resolution path dependency scheme $$\\\\texttt{D}^{\\\\texttt{rrs}}$$\\n \\n D\\n rrs\\n \\n is used, a mixed picture emerges: the proof systems that add $$\\\\texttt{D}^{\\\\texttt{rrs}}$$\\n \\n D\\n rrs\\n \\n to $$\\\\texttt{QCDCL}$$\\n QCDCL\\n in these three ways are not only incomparable with each other, but are also incomparable with the basic $$\\\\texttt{QCDCL}$$\\n QCDCL\\n proof system that does not use $$\\\\texttt{D}^{\\\\texttt{rrs}}$$\\n \\n D\\n rrs\\n \\n at all, as well as with several other resolution-based QBF proof systems. A notable fact is that all our separations are achieved through QBFs with bounded quantifier alternation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11639,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex.\",\"volume\":\"69 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2023.38\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2023.38","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
在量化布尔公式 QBF 中,依赖性方案有助于检测虚假或多余的依赖性,这些依赖性由量词前缀中的变量排序所隐含,但对于构建反模型并不重要。这种检测可以缩短特定证明系统中的反驳时间,并有望加快QBF求解器的运行速度。贝耶斯多夫(Beyersdorff)和博姆(Boehm)最近定义的证明系统 $$text\tt{QCDCL}$$ QCDCL(LMCS 2023)抽象了基于冲突驱动子句学习(CDCL)技术的 QBF 求解器所使用的推理。我们展示了如何在预处理阶段、传播和子句学习阶段,或在这两个阶段,将依赖关系方案的使用纳入该证明系统。然后,我们展示了当使用反向解析路径依赖方案 $$\texttt{D}^{texttt{rrs}}$ D rrs 时,会出现一种混合的情况:以这三种方式在 $$texttt{QCDCL}$ QCDCL 中添加 $$texttt{D}^{texttt{rrs}}$ D rrs 的证明系统不仅彼此不可比,而且与完全不使用 $$texttt{D}^{texttt{rrs}}$ D rrs 的基本 $$texttt{QCDCL}$ QCDCL 证明系统以及其他几个基于解析的 QBF 证明系统也不可比。一个值得注意的事实是,我们所有的分离都是通过有界量词交替的 QBF 实现的。
Dependency schemes in CDCL-based QBF solving: a proof-theoretic study
In Quantified Boolean Formulas QBFs, dependency schemes help to detect spurious or superfluous dependencies that are implied by the variable ordering in the quantifier prefix but are not essential for constructing countermodels. This detection can provably shorten refutations in specific proof systems, and is expected to speed up runs of QBF solvers. The proof system $$\texttt{QCDCL}$$
QCDCL
recently defined by Beyersdorff and Boehm (LMCS 2023) abstracts the reasoning employed by QBF solvers based on conflict-driven clause-learning (CDCL) techniques. We show how to incorporate the use of dependency schemes into this proof system, either in a preprocessing phase, or in the propagations and clause learning, or both. We then show that when the reflexive resolution path dependency scheme $$\texttt{D}^{\texttt{rrs}}$$
D
rrs
is used, a mixed picture emerges: the proof systems that add $$\texttt{D}^{\texttt{rrs}}$$
D
rrs
to $$\texttt{QCDCL}$$
QCDCL
in these three ways are not only incomparable with each other, but are also incomparable with the basic $$\texttt{QCDCL}$$
QCDCL
proof system that does not use $$\texttt{D}^{\texttt{rrs}}$$
D
rrs
at all, as well as with several other resolution-based QBF proof systems. A notable fact is that all our separations are achieved through QBFs with bounded quantifier alternation.