2+p-SAT: relation of typical-case complexity to the nature of the phase transition

Heuristic methods for solution of problems in the NP-complete class of decision problems often reach exact solutions, but fail badly at “phase boundaries,” across which the decision to be reached changes from almost always having one value to almost always having a different value. We report an analytic solution and experimental investigations of the phase transition that occurs in the limit of very large problems in K-SAT. Studying a model which interpolates K-SAT between K=2 and K=3, we find a change from a continuous to a discontinuous phase transition when K, the average number of inputs per clause, exceeds 0.4. The cost of finding solutions also increases dramatically above this changeover. The nature of its “random first-order” phase transition, seen at values of K large enough to make the computational cost of solving typical instances increase exponentially with problem size, suggests a mechanism for the cost increase. There has been evidence for features like the “backbone” of frozen inputs which characterizes the UNSAT phase in K-SAT in the study of models of disordered materials, but this feature and this transition are uniquely accessible to analysis in K-SAT. The random first-order transition combines properties of the first-order (discontinuous onset of order) and second-order (with power law scaling, e.g., of the width of the critical region in a finite system) transitions known in the physics of pure solids. Such transitions should occur in other combinatoric problems in the large N limit. Finally, improved search heuristics may be developed when a “backbone” is known to exist. ©1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Random Struct. Alg., 15, 414–435, 1999

[1]  Hilary Putnam,et al.  A Computing Procedure for Quantification Theory , 1960, JACM.

[2]  Thomas M. Cover,et al.  Geometrical and Statistical Properties of Systems of Linear Inequalities with Applications in Pattern Recognition , 1965, IEEE Trans. Electron. Comput..

[3]  Stephen A. Cook,et al.  The complexity of theorem-proving procedures , 1971, STOC.

[4]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[5]  Robert E. Tarjan,et al.  A Linear-Time Algorithm for Testing the Truth of Certain Quantified Boolean Formulas , 1979, Inf. Process. Lett..

[6]  B. Derrida Random-energy model: An exactly solvable model of disordered systems , 1981 .

[7]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[8]  M. Mézard,et al.  The simplest spin glass , 1984 .

[9]  Béla Bollobás,et al.  Random Graphs , 1985 .

[10]  S. Kirkpatrick,et al.  Configuration space analysis of travelling salesman problems , 1985 .

[11]  M. Mézard,et al.  Spin Glass Theory and Beyond , 1987 .

[12]  Daniel L. Stein,et al.  Lectures In The Sciences Of Complexity , 1989 .

[13]  E. Gardner,et al.  Three unfinished works on the optimal storage capacity of networks , 1989 .

[14]  Anders Krogh,et al.  Introduction to the theory of neural computation , 1994, The advanced book program.

[15]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  Hard and Easy Distributions of SAT Problems , 1992, AAAI.

[16]  James M. Crawford,et al.  Experimental Results on the Crossover Point inSatis ability , 1993 .

[17]  S Kirkpatrick,et al.  Critical Behavior in the Satisfiability of Random Boolean Expressions , 1994, Science.

[18]  R. Palmer,et al.  Introduction to the theory of neural computation , 1994, The advanced book program.

[19]  Tail Bounds for Occupancy and the Satisfiability Threshold Conjecture , 1995, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[20]  J. M. Singer,et al.  Searching for backbones — an efficient parallel algorithm for the traveling salesman problem , 1996 .

[21]  Alan M. Frieze,et al.  Analysis of Two Simple Heuristics on a Random Instance of k-SAT , 1996, J. Algorithms.

[22]  S. Kirkpatrick,et al.  Phase transition and search cost in the 2+p-sat problem , 1996 .

[23]  Bart Selman,et al.  Critical Behavior in the Computational Cost of Satisfiability Testing , 1996, Artif. Intell..

[24]  Andreas Goerdt A Threshold for Unsatisfiability , 1996, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[25]  Monasson,et al.  Entropy of the K-satisfiability problem. , 1996, Physical review letters.

[26]  R. Monasson,et al.  Statistical Mechanics of the K--Satisfiability Model , 1996, cond-mat/9606215.

[27]  Yacine Boufkhad,et al.  A General Upper Bound for the Satisfiability Threshold of Random r-SAT Formulae , 1997, J. Algorithms.

[28]  N. Sourlas,et al.  The 3d random field Ising model at zero temperature , 1997 .

[29]  Brian Hayes,et al.  CAN’T GET NO SATISFACTION , 1997 .

[30]  R. Zecchina,et al.  Tricritical points in random combinatorics: the -SAT case , 1998, cond-mat/9810008.

[31]  M. Fisher Renormalization group theory: Its basis and formulation in statistical physics , 1998 .

[32]  Michael E. Saks,et al.  On the complexity of unsatisfiability proofs for random k-CNF formulas , 1998, STOC '98.

[33]  Michel Talagrand,et al.  The Sherrington–Kirkpatrick model: a challenge for mathematicians , 1998 .

[34]  L. Kirousis,et al.  Approximating the unsatisfiability threshold of random formulas , 1998 .

[35]  R. Monasson Optimization problems and replica symmetry breaking in finite connectivity spin glasses , 1997, cond-mat/9707089.

[36]  M. Talagrand Huge random structures and mean field models for spin glasses. , 1998 .

[37]  Some remarks on hierarchical replica symmetry breaking in finite-connectivity systems , 1998 .

[38]  Antonio Gliozzi,et al.  On the Ground State Structure of P and Np-Complete Random Decision Problems , 1999 .