Skip to main content
Log in

Experimental analyses on phase transitions in compiling satisfiability problems

可满足性问题知识编译过程中相变现象的实验分析

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Science China Information Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the past decade, a kind of well-known phenomena in many complex combinatorial problems such as satisfiability problem, called phase transition, have been widely studied. In this paper, the phase transition phenomena are investigated during compiling k-satisfiability problems into tractable languages with empirical methods. Ordered binary decision diagram and deterministic-decomposable negation normal form are selected as the tractable target languages for the compilation. Via intensive experiments, it can be concluded that an easy-hard-easy pattern exists during the compilations, which is only related to the ratio of the number of clauses to that of variables if we set k to a fixed value, rather than to the target languages. Moreover, it can be concluded that the space exhausted during the compilations grows exponentially with the number of variables growing, whereas there is also a phase transition separating the polynomial-increment region from the exponential-increment region. Additionally, it can be observed that there is a phase transition of prime implicants around peak points of the easy-hard-easy pattern and the ratios of random instances whose average lengths of prime implicants are larger than the threshold 0.5 change sharply. From these analyses, it can be concluded that prime implicant length and solution interchangeability are crucial impacts on sizes of compilation results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cheeseman P, Kanefsky B, Taylor W M. Where the really hard problems are. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Sydney, 1991. 331–340

    Google Scholar 

  2. Xu K, Li W. Exact phase transitions in random constraint satisfaction problems. J Artif Intell Res, 2000, 12: 93–103

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Achlioptas D, Naor A, Peres Y. Rigorous location of phase transitions in hard optimization problems. Nature, 2005, 435: 759–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gent I P, Walsh T. Beyond NP: the QSAT phase transition. In: Proceedings of the 16th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Eleventh Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Orlando, 1999. 648–653

    Google Scholar 

  5. Creignou N, Daudé H, Egly U, et al. New results on the phase transition for random quantified boolean formulas. In: Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing, Guangzhou, 2008. 34–47

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rintanen J. Phase transitions in classical planning: an experimental study. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, Whistler, 2004. 101–110

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gent I P, Walsh T. The TSP phase transition. Artif Intell, 1996, 88: 349–358

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Xu K, Li W. An average analysis of backtracking on random constraint satisfaction problems. Ann Math Artif Intell, 2001, 33: 21–37

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Xu K, Li W. Many hard examples in exact phase transitions. Theor Comput Sci, 2006, 355: 291–302

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Cai S, Su K, Luo C, et al. NuMVC: an efficient local search algorithm for minimum vertex cover. J Artif Intell Res, 2013, 46: 687–716

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Cai S, Su K, Sattar A. Two new local search strategies for minimum vertex cover. In: Proceedings of the 26th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Toronto, 2012, 441–447

    Google Scholar 

  12. Li L, Liu T, Xu K. Variable-centered consistency in model RB. Mind Machine, 2013, 23: 95–103

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang C, Liu T, Xu K. Large hypertree width for sparse random hypergraphs. In: Proceedings of 3rd Joint International Conference on Frontiers in Algorithmics and Algorithmic Aspects in Information and Management, Dalian, 2013. 294–302

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Xu K, Boussemart F, Hemery F, et al. Random constraint satisfaction: easy generation of hard (satisfiable) instances. Artif Intell, 2007, 171: 514–534

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Fan Y, Shen J. On the phase transitions of random k-constraint satisfaction problems. Artif Intell, 2011, 175: 914–927

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Fan Y, Shen J, Xu K. A general model and thresholds for random constraint satisfaction problems. Artif Intell, 2012, 193: 1–17

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Walsh T. Where are the really hard manipulation problems? The phase transition in manipulating the veto rule. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Pasadena, 2009. 324–329

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zhou J, Huang P, Yin M, et al. Phase transitions of EXPSPACE-Complete problems. Int J Found Comput Sci, 2010, 21: 1073–1088

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Bailey D D, Dalmau V, Kolaitis P G. Phase transitions of PP-Complete satisfiability problems. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Seattle, 2001. 183–192

    Google Scholar 

  20. Li L, Liu T, Xu K. Exact phase transition of backtrack-free search with implications on the power of greedy algorithms. arXiv, 2008. arXiv:0811.3055

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cadoli M, and Donini F. A survey on knowledge compilation. AI Communications, 1998, 10: 137–150

    Google Scholar 

  22. Narodytska N, Walsh T. Constraint and variable ordering heuristics for compiling configuration problems. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hyderabad, 2007. 149–154

    Google Scholar 

  23. Selman B, Kautz H A. Knowledge compilation and theory approximation. J ACM, 1996, 43: 193–224

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Darwiche A. A compiler for deterministic, decomposable negation normal form. In: Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Fourteenth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Edmonton, 2002. 627–634

    Google Scholar 

  25. Amilhastre J, Fargier H, Marquis P. Consistency restoration and explanations in dynamic CSPs Application to configuration. Artif Intell, 2002, 135: 199–234

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Mateescu R, Dechter R, Marinescu R. AND/OR multi-valued decision diagrams (AOMDDs) for graphical models. J Artif Intell Res, 2008, 33: 465–519

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Darwiche A, Marquis P. A knowledge compilation map. J Artif Intell Res, 2002, 17: 229–264

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Schrag R, Crawford J M. Implicates and prime implicates in Random 3-SAT. Artif Intell, 1996, 81: 199–222

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Gao J, Yin M, Xu K. Phase transitions in knowledge compilation: an experimental study. SAT 2011, 364–366

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mitchell D G, Selman B, Levesque H J. Hard and easy distributions of SAT problems. In: Proceedings of the 10th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. San Jose, 1992. 459–465

    Google Scholar 

  31. Huang P, Yin M, Xu K. Exact phase transitions and approximate algorithm of #CSP. In: Proceedings of the 25th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, San Francisco, 2011. 1790–1791

    Google Scholar 

  32. Birnbaum E, Lozinskii E L. The good old Davis-Putnam procedure helps counting models. J Artif Intell Res, 1999, 10: 457–477

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. Roberto J, Bayardo Jr, Pehoushek J D. Counting models using connected components. In: Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Twelfth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Austin, 2000. 157–162

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kean A, Tsiknis G. An incremental method for generating prime implicants/implicates. J Symbolic Comput, 1990, 9: 185–206

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Umans C. The minimum equivalent DNF problem and shortest implicants. J Comput Syst Sci, 2001, 63: 597–611

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Boufkhad Y, Dubois O. Length of prime implicants and number of solutions of random CNF formulae. Theor Comput Sci, 1999, 215: 1–30

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  37. Selman B, Kautz H, Cohen B. Local search strategies for satisfiability testing. Clique Color Satisf 2nd DIMACS Implement Challenge, 1993, 26: 521–532

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to JiaNan Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gao, J., Wang, J. & Yin, M. Experimental analyses on phase transitions in compiling satisfiability problems. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 58, 1–11 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-014-5154-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-014-5154-0

Keywords

关键词

Navigation