2017
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-66263-3_17
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Shortening QBF Proofs with Dependency Schemes

Abstract: Abstract. We provide the first proof complexity results for QBF dependency calculi. By showing that the reflexive resolution path dependency scheme admits exponentially shorter Q-resolution proofs on a known family of instances, we answer a question first posed by Slivovsky and Szeider in 2014 [30]. Further, we conceive a method of QBF solving in which dependency recomputation is utilised as a form of inprocessing. Formalising this notion, we introduce a new calculus in which a dependency scheme is applied dy… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
(33 reference statements)
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Third, by keeping long-distance Q-resolution as the underlying proof system, QCDCL with dependency learning is amenable to a simple correctness proof and enjoys linear-time strategy extraction. Blinkhorn and Beyersdorff (2017) offered a strong proof-theoretic argument in favor QCDCL with dependency schemes over "vanilla" QCDCL by proving an exponential separation of Q(D rrs )-resolution and ordinary Q-resolution, where Q(D rrs )-resolution is the proof system used by QCDCL with the reflexive resolution-path dependency scheme D rrs and a form of constraint learning that avoids long-distance resolution (e.g. Lonsing, Egly, & Van Gelder, 2013).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, by keeping long-distance Q-resolution as the underlying proof system, QCDCL with dependency learning is amenable to a simple correctness proof and enjoys linear-time strategy extraction. Blinkhorn and Beyersdorff (2017) offered a strong proof-theoretic argument in favor QCDCL with dependency schemes over "vanilla" QCDCL by proving an exponential separation of Q(D rrs )-resolution and ordinary Q-resolution, where Q(D rrs )-resolution is the proof system used by QCDCL with the reflexive resolution-path dependency scheme D rrs and a form of constraint learning that avoids long-distance resolution (e.g. Lonsing, Egly, & Van Gelder, 2013).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of solutions have been proposed for the second problem, most of which are subsumed by the application of dependency schemes [17]. While the use of dependency schemes can speed up solving times [2] and has the potential to dramatically decrease proof sizes in some cases [4], it has distinct disadvantages, such as the fact that it changes the underlying proof system and thus complicates strategy extraction.…”
Section: Prenex Conjunctive Normal Form (Pcnf) the Default Encoding mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, a dependency scheme allows to exploit independence of certain variables in order to strengthen the universal reduction rule in Q-resolution. Exploiting independence by dependency schemes and related concepts was explored in practical work on solving [29] and in theoretical work on QBF proof complexity [6].…”
Section: Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The variant of DepQBF we submitted to QBFEVAL'18 is based on version 6.03 [23]. Compared to previous versions, version 6.03 comes with an advanced technique for cube learning [19] by tightly integrating blocked clause elimination [5,10] into the QCDCL workflow. Thereby, the goal is to dynamically and temporarily remove clauses that are redundant in the current search context.…”
Section: Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%