CNF Satisfiability in a Subspace and Related Problems

We introduce the problem of finding a satisfying assignment to a CNF formula that must further belong to a prescribed input subspace. Equivalent formulations of the problem include finding a point outside a union of subspaces (the Union-of-Subspace Avoidance (USA) problem), and finding a common zero of a system of polynomials over F2 each of which is a product of affine forms. We focus on the case of k-CNF formulas (the k-SUB-SAT problem). Clearly, k-SUB-SAT is no easier than k-SAT, and might be harder. Indeed, via simple reductions we show that 2-SUB-SAT is NP-hard, and W[1]-hard when parameterized by the co-dimension of the subspace. We also prove that the optimization version Max-2-SUB-SAT is NP-hard to approximate better than the trivial 3/4 ratio even on satisfiable instances. On the algorithmic front, we investigate fast exponential algorithms which give non-trivial savings over brute-force algorithms. We give a simple branching algorithm with runtime (1.5) for 2-SUB-SAT, where r is the subspace dimension, as well as a (1.4312) time algorithm where n is the number of variables. Turning to k-SUB-SAT for k > 3, while known algorithms for solving a system of degree k polynomial equations already imply a solution with runtime ≈ 2r(1−1/2k), we explore a more combinatorial approach. Based on an analysis of critical variables (a key notion underlying the randomized k-SAT algorithm of Paturi, Pudlak, and Zane), we give an algorithm with runtime ≈ ( n 6t ) 2n−n/k where n is the number of variables and t is the co-dimension of the subspace. This improves upon the runtime of the polynomial equations approach for small co-dimension. Our combinatorial approach also achieves polynomial space in contrast to the algebraic approach that uses exponential space. We also give a PPZ-style algorithm for k-SUB-SAT with runtime ≈ 2n−n/2k. This algorithm is in fact oblivious to the structure of the subspace, and extends when the subspace-membership constraint is replaced by any constraint for which partial satisfying assignments can be efficiently completed to a full satisfying assignment. Finally, for systems of O(n) polynomial equations in n variables over F2, we give a fast exponential algorithm when each polynomial has bounded degree irreducible factors (but can otherwise have large degree) using a degree reduction trick. ∗Institute of Mathematical Sciences (HBNI), Chennai, India. Email: arvind@imsc.res.in †Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA. Email: venkatg@cs.cmu.edu. Portions of this work were done during visits to the Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai. Research supported in part by the US National Science Foundation grant CCF-1908125 and a Simons Investigator Award. ISSN 1433-8092 Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, Report No. 112 (2021)

[1]  Venkatesan Guruswami,et al.  CSPs with global modular constraints: algorithms and hardness via polynomial representations , 2019, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[2]  Thomas J. Schaefer,et al.  The complexity of satisfiability problems , 1978, STOC.

[3]  Magnus Wahlström,et al.  Which NP-Hard SAT and CSP Problems Admit Exponentially Improved Algorithms? , 2018, ArXiv.

[4]  Rahul Santhanam,et al.  Satisfiability on Mixed Instances , 2016, ITCS.

[5]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Which problems have strongly exponential complexity? , 1998, Proceedings 39th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No.98CB36280).

[6]  Michael R. Fellows,et al.  On the parameterized complexity of multiple-interval graph problems , 2009, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[7]  Mihai Patrascu,et al.  On the possibility of faster SAT algorithms , 2010, SODA '10.

[8]  U. Schöning A probabilistic algorithm for k-SAT and constraint satisfaction problems , 1999, 40th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No.99CB37039).

[9]  Pavel Pudlák,et al.  Satisfiability Coding Lemma , 1997, Proceedings 38th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[10]  Itai Dinur,et al.  Improved Algorithms for Solving Polynomial Systems over GF(2) by Multiple Parity-Counting , 2020, SODA.

[11]  Peter Jonsson,et al.  Fine-Grained Time Complexity of Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 2021, ACM Trans. Comput. Theory.

[12]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Complexity of k-SAT , 1999, Proceedings. Fourteenth Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (Formerly: Structure in Complexity Theory Conference) (Cat.No.99CB36317).

[13]  Mate Soos,et al.  BIRD: Engineering an Efficient CNF-XOR SAT Solver and Its Applications to Approximate Model Counting , 2019, AAAI.

[14]  Andreas Björklund,et al.  Solving Systems of Polynomial Equations over GF(2) by a Parity-Counting Self-Reduction , 2019, ICALP.

[15]  Gustav Nordh,et al.  Strong partial clones and the time complexity of SAT problems , 2017, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[16]  Leslie G. Valiant,et al.  NP is as easy as detecting unique solutions , 1985, STOC '85.

[17]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  A satisfiability algorithm for AC0 , 2012, ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms.

[18]  Mate Soos,et al.  Tinted, Detached, and Lazy CNF-XOR Solving and Its Applications to Counting and Sampling , 2020, CAV.

[19]  Erich Kaltofen,et al.  Factorization of Polynomials Given by Straight-Line Programs , 1989, Adv. Comput. Res..

[20]  Rainer Schuler,et al.  An algorithm for the satisfiability problem of formulas in conjunctive normal form , 2005, J. Algorithms.

[21]  Ewald Speckenmeyer,et al.  Solving satisfiability in less than 2n steps , 1985, Discret. Appl. Math..

[22]  Michael R. Fellows,et al.  Parameterized Complexity , 1998 .

[23]  Timothy M. Chan,et al.  Deterministic APSP, Orthogonal Vectors, and More: Quickly Derandomizing Razborov-Smolensky , 2016, SODA.

[24]  Jörg Flum,et al.  Parameterized Complexity Theory (Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series) , 2006 .

[25]  Huacheng Yu,et al.  Beating Brute Force for Systems of Polynomial Equations over Finite Fields , 2017, SODA.

[26]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  A duality between clause width and clause density for SAT , 2006, 21st Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC'06).

[27]  Venkatesan Guruswami,et al.  Bridging between 0/1 and linear programming via random walks , 2019, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[28]  Miguel Couceiro,et al.  Fine-Grained Complexity of Constraint Satisfaction Problems through Partial Polymorphisms: A Survey , 2019, 2019 IEEE 49th International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic (ISMVL).