Choosing the Variable Ordering for Cylindrical Algebraic Decomposition via Exploiting Chordal Structure

Cylindrical algebraic decomposition (CAD) plays an important role in the field of real algebraic geometry and many other areas. As is well-known, the choice of variable ordering while computing CAD has a great effect on the time and memory use of the computation as well as the number of sample points computed. In this paper, we indicate that typical CAD algorithms, if executed with respect to a special kind of variable orderings (called "the perfect elimination orderings''), naturally preserve chordality, which is well compatible with an important (variable) sparsity pattern called "the correlative sparsity''. Experimentation suggests that if the associated graph of the polynomial system in question is chordal (resp., is nearly chordal), then a perfect elimination ordering of the associated graph (resp., of a minimal chordal completion of the associated graph) can be a good variable ordering for the CAD computation. That is, by using the perfect elimination orderings, the CAD computation may produce a much smaller full set of projection polynomials than by using other naive variable orderings. More importantly, for the complexity analysis of the CAD computation via a perfect elimination ordering, an (m,d)-property of the full set of projection polynomials obtained via such an ordering is given, through which the "size'' of this set is characterized. This property indicates that when the corresponding perfect elimination tree has a lower height, the full set of projection polynomials also tends to have a smaller "size''. This is well consistent with the experimental results, hence the perfect elimination orderings with lower elimination tree height are further recommended to be used in the CAD projection.

[1]  Changbo Chen,et al.  Variable Ordering Selection for Cylindrical Algebraic Decomposition with Artificial Neural Networks , 2020, ICMS.

[2]  Pablo A. Parrilo,et al.  Exploiting Chordal Structure in Polynomial Ideals: A Gröbner Bases Approach , 2014, SIAM J. Discret. Math..

[3]  Bican Xia,et al.  A complete algorithm for automated discovering of a class of inequality-type theorems , 2001, Science in China Series F Information Sciences.

[4]  George E. Collins,et al.  Partial Cylindrical Algebraic Decomposition for Quantifier Elimination , 1991, J. Symb. Comput..

[5]  Scott McCallum,et al.  An Improved Projection Operation for Cylindrical Algebraic Decomposition of Three-Dimensional Space , 1988, J. Symb. Comput..

[6]  Andreas Seidl,et al.  Efficient projection orders for CAD , 2004, ISSAC '04.

[7]  Changbo Chen,et al.  Chordality Preserving Incremental Triangular Decomposition and Its Implementation , 2020, ICMS.

[8]  Matthew England,et al.  Comparing machine learning models to choose the variable ordering for cylindrical algebraic decomposition , 2019, CICM.

[9]  Adam W. Strzebonski,et al.  Cylindrical Algebraic Decomposition using validated numerics , 2006, J. Symb. Comput..

[10]  Christopher W. Brown.  Open Non-uniform Cylindrical Algebraic Decompositions , 2015, ISSAC.

[11]  S. Parter.  The Use of Linear Graphs in Gauss Elimination , 1961 .

[12]  Blair J R S,et al.  Introduction to Chordal Graphs and Clique Trees, in Graph Theory and Sparse Matrix Computation , 1997 .

[13]  Scott McCallum,et al.  An Improved Projection Operation for Cylindrical Algebraic Decomposition , 1985, European Conference on Computer Algebra.

[14]  Barry W. Peyton,et al.  Maximum Cardinality Search for Computing Minimal Triangulations of Graphs , 2004, Algorithmica.

[15]  Chenqi Mou,et al.  Chordal Graphs in Triangular Decomposition in Top-Down Style , 2018, J. Symb. Comput..

[16]  Christopher W. Brown.  Improved Projection for Cylindrical Algebraic Decomposition , 2001, J. Symb. Comput..

[17]  Liyun Dai,et al.  Open Weak CAD and Its Applications , 2017, J. Symb. Comput..

[18]  Adam W. Strzebonski.  Cylindrical algebraic decomposition using local projections , 2016, J. Symb. Comput..

[19]  Changbo Chen,et al.  Computing cylindrical algebraic decomposition via triangular decomposition , 2009, ISSAC '09.

[20]  Bican Xia,et al.  Proving inequalities and solving global optimization problems via simplified CAD projection , 2012, J. Symb. Comput..

[21]  H. Hong.  An improvement of the projection operator in cylindrical algebraic decomposition , 1990, ISSAC '90.

[22]  George E. Collins,et al.  Quantifier elimination for real closed fields by cylindrical algebraic decomposition , 1975 .

[23]  B. Peyton,et al.  An Introduction to Chordal Graphs and Clique Trees , 1993 .

[24]  Hoon Hong,et al.  Improvements in cad-based quantifier elimination , 1990 .

[25]  Matthew England,et al.  Applying machine learning to the problem of choosing a heuristic to select the variable ordering for cylindrical algebraic decomposition , 2014, CICM.

[26]  Chenqi Mou,et al.  On the Chordality of Simple Decomposition in Top-Down Style , 2019, MACIS.

[27]  Matthew England,et al.  Truth table invariant cylindrical algebraic decomposition , 2014, J. Symb. Comput..

[28]  Pablo A. Parrilo,et al.  Chordal networks of polynomial ideals , 2016, SIAM J. Appl. Algebra Geom..

[29]  Matthew England,et al.  Optimising Problem Formulation for Cylindrical Algebraic Decomposition , 2013, MKM/Calculemus/DML.

[30]  Mohab Safey El Din,et al.  Variant quantifier elimination , 2012, J. Symb. Comput..

[31]  Bernd Sturmfels,et al.  Lattice Walks and Primary Decomposition , 1998 .

[32]  Masakazu Muramatsu,et al.  Sums of Squares and Semidefinite Programming Relaxations for Polynomial Optimization Problems with Structured Sparsity , 2004 .