What Is a Real-World SAT Instance?

Frequently, in the SAT and CSP communities, people talk about real-world problems, without any formal or precise definition of what “real-world” means. This notion is used as opposed to randomly generated problems and theoretical combinatorial principles, like the pigeonhole. People agree that modern SAT and CSP solvers perform well in these real-world problems with a hidden structure, and more so as more intelligent are the strategies used on them. Here we define a formal notion, called the Strahler number, that measures the degree of structure of an unsatisfiable SAT instance. We argue why this notion corresponds to the informal idea of real-world problem. If a formula has an small Strahler number, then it has a lot of structure, and it is easy to prove it, even if it has many variables. We prove that there is a SAT solver, the Beame-Pitassi algorithm [2], that works on time O(ns), being n the number of variables, and s the Strahler of the formula. We also show that Horn and 2-SAT unsatisfiable formulas, that can be solved in polynomial time, have Strahler number 1 and 2 respectively. We compare the Strahler number with other notions defined with the same purpose like backdoors [15], and prove that the Strahler number can be arbitrarily smaller than the size of strong backdoors. We show the same relation for the size of cycle-cutsets and the treewidth in tree decompositions. Finally, we compare with the space of resolution calculus, defined for a different purpose.

[1]  Rina Dechter,et al.  Tree Clustering for Constraint Networks , 1989, Artif. Intell..

[2]  Jacobo Torán,et al.  Space Bounds for Resolution , 2001, Inf. Comput..

[3]  J. Freeman Improvements to propositional satisfiability search algorithms , 1995 .

[4]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Simplified and improved resolution lower bounds , 1996, Proceedings of 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science.

[5]  Joël Ouaknine,et al.  Sudoku as a SAT Problem , 2006, ISAIM.

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

[7]  Chu Min Li,et al.  Look-Ahead Versus Look-Back for Satisfiability Problems , 1997, CP.

[8]  A. N. Strahler Hypsometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topography. , 1952 .

[9]  Henry A. Kautz,et al.  Towards Understanding and Harnessing the Potential of Clause Learning , 2004, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[10]  Andrei P. Ershov On programming of arithmetic operations , 1958, CACM.

[11]  Bart Selman,et al.  Backdoors To Typical Case Complexity , 2003, IJCAI.

[12]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  A Comparison of Structural CSP Decomposition Methods , 1999, IJCAI.

[13]  Eli Ben-Sasson,et al.  Space complexity of random formulae in resolution , 2003, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[14]  Lawrence J. Henschen,et al.  Unit Refutations and Horn Sets , 1974, JACM.

[15]  R. Horton EROSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF STREAMS AND THEIR DRAINAGE BASINS; HYDROPHYSICAL APPROACH TO QUANTITATIVE MORPHOLOGY , 1945 .