DPLL with a Trace: From SAT to Knowledge Compilation

We show that the trace of an exhaustive DPLL search can be viewed as a compilation of the propositional theory. With different constraints imposed or lifted on the DPLL algorithm, this compilation will belong to the language of d-DNNF, FBDD, and OBDD, respectively. These languages are decreasingly succinct, yet increasingly tractable, supporting such polynomial-time queries as model counting and equivalence testing. Our contribution is thus twofold. First, we provide a uniform framework, supported by empirical evaluations, for compiling knowledge into various languages of interest. Second, we show that given a particular variant of DPLL, by identifying the language membership of its traces, one gains a fundamental understanding of the intrinsic complexity and computational power of the search algorithm itself. As interesting examples, we unveil the "hidden power" of several recent model counters, point to one of their potential limitations, and identify a key limitation of DPLL-based procedures in general.

[1]  Rina Dechter,et al.  The Impact of AND/OR Search Spaces on Constraint Satisfaction and Counting , 2004, CP.

[2]  Donald W. Loveland,et al.  A machine program for theorem-proving , 2011, CACM.

[3]  Bart Selman,et al.  Knowledge compilation and theory approximation , 1996, JACM.

[4]  Anthony Barrett,et al.  From Hybrid Systems to Universal Plans via Domain Compilation , 2004, ICAPS.

[5]  Adnan Darwiche,et al.  Decomposable negation normal form , 2001, JACM.

[6]  Marco Cadoli,et al.  A Survey on Knowledge Compilation , 1997, AI Commun..

[7]  Bart Selman,et al.  Knowledge Compilation using Horn Approximations , 1991, AAAI.

[8]  Adnan Darwiche,et al.  Testing Equivalence Probabilistically , 2002 .

[9]  Adnan Darwiche,et al.  New Advances in Compiling CNF into Decomposable Negation Normal Form , 2004, ECAI.

[10]  Pierre Marquis,et al.  Knowledge Compilation Using Theory Prime Implicates , 1995, IJCAI.

[11]  Michael L. Littman,et al.  Using Caching to Solve Larger Probabilistic Planning Problems , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.

[12]  Pierre Marquis,et al.  A Knowledge Compilation Map , 2002, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[13]  Adnan Darwiche,et al.  Using DPLL for Efficient OBDD Construction , 2004, SAT.

[14]  Roberto J. Bayardo,et al.  Counting Models Using Connected Components , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[15]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Combining Component Caching and Clause Learning for Effective Model Counting , 2004, SAT.

[16]  Randal E. Bryant,et al.  Graph-Based Algorithms for Boolean Function Manipulation , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[17]  Christoph Meinel,et al.  Efficient Boolean Manipulation With OBDD's can be Extended to FBDD's , 1994, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[18]  Adnan Darwiche,et al.  A compiler for deterministic, decomposable negation normal form , 2002, AAAI/IAAI.

[19]  Manuel Blum,et al.  Equivalence of Free Boolean Graphs can be Decided Probabilistically in Polynomial Time , 1980, Inf. Process. Lett..

[20]  Blai Bonet,et al.  Pruning Conformant Plans by Counting Models on Compiled d-DNNF Representations , 2005, ICAPS.

[21]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Chaff: engineering an efficient SAT solver , 2001, Proceedings of the 38th Design Automation Conference (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37232).

[22]  Thomas Stützle,et al.  SATLIB: An Online Resource for Research on SAT , 2000 .

[23]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Algorithms and complexity results for #SAT and Bayesian inference , 2003, 44th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2003. Proceedings..

[24]  Igor L. Markov,et al.  Faster SAT and smaller BDDs via common function structure , 2001, IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer Aided Design. ICCAD 2001. IEEE/ACM Digest of Technical Papers (Cat. No.01CH37281).

[25]  Rina Dechter,et al.  Mixtures of Deterministic-Probabilistic Networks and their AND/OR Search Space , 2004, UAI.