skip to main content
article

An improved exponential-time algorithm for k-SAT

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 May 2005Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We propose and analyze a simple new randomized algorithm, called ResolveSat, for finding satisfying assignments of Boolean formulas in conjunctive normal form. The algorithm consists of two stages: a preprocessing stage in which resolution is applied to enlarge the set of clauses of the formula, followed by a search stage that uses a simple randomized greedy procedure to look for a satisfying assignment. Currently, this is the fastest known probabilistic algorithm for k-CNF satisfiability for k ≥ 4 (with a running time of O(20.5625n) for 4-CNF). In addition, it is the fastest known probabilistic algorithm for k-CNF, k ≥ 3, that have at most one satisfying assignment (unique k-SAT) (with a running time O(2(2 ln 2 − 1)n + o(n)) = O(20.386 … n) in the case of 3-CNF). The analysis of the algorithm also gives an upper bound on the number of the codewords of a code defined by a k-CNF. This is applied to prove a lower bounds on depth 3 circuits accepting codes with nonconstant distance. In particular we prove a lower bound Ω(21.282…√>i<n>/i<) for an explicitly given Boolean function of n variables. This is the first such lower bound that is asymptotically bigger than 2√>i<n>/i< + o(√>i<n>/i<).

References

  1. Alon, N., Spencer, J., and Erdös, P. 1992. The Probabilistic Method. Wiley, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Dantsin, E., Goerdt, A., Hirsch, E. A., Kannan, R., Kleinberg, J., Papadimitriou, C., Raghavan, P., and Schöning, U. 2002. A deterministic (2 &minus; 2/k &plus; 1)n algorithm for k-SAT based on local search. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 289, 69--83. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Davis, M., Logemann, G., and Loveland, D. 1962. A machine program for theorem proving, Commun. ACM 5, 394--397. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Galil, Z. 1975. On the validity and complexity of bounded resolution. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, New York, 72--82. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Harris, T. E. 1960. A lower bound for the critical probability in a certain percolation process. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 56, 13--20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Håstad, J. 1986. Almost optimal lower bounds for small depth circuits. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, New York, 6--20. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Håstad, J., Jukna, S., and Pudlák, P. 1993. Top--down lower bounds for depth 3 circuits. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., 124--129.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Hirsch, E. 2000. New worst-case upper bounds for SAT. J. Automat. Reas. 24, 4, 397--420. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Hirsch, E., and Kojevnikov, A. 2002. Unit Walk: A new SAT solver that uses local search guided by unit clause elimination. In Proceedings of 5th International Symposium on the Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2002). 35--42Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Hofmeister, T., Schöning, U., Schuler, R., and Watanabe, O. 2002. A probabilistic 3-SAT algorithm further improved. In STACS 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2285. Springer-Verlag, New York, 192--202. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Kullmann, O. 1999. New methods for 3-SAT decision and worst-case analysis. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 223, 1-2 (July), 1--72. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Kullmann, O., and Luckhardt, H. 1998. Algorithms for SAT/TAUT decision based on various measures. Preprint, 81 pages http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/kullmann/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. MacWilliams, F. J., and Sloane, N. J. 1977. The Theory of Error-Correcting Codes. North-Holland, Amsterdam The Netherland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Monien, B., and Speckenmeyer, E. 1985. Solving satisfiability in less than 2n steps. Discr. Appl. Math. 10, 287--295.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Paturi, R., Pudlák, P., Saks, M., and Zane, F. 1998. An improved exponential-time algorithm for k-SAT. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., 628--637. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Paturi, R., Pudlák, P., and Zane, F. 1997. Satisfiability coding lemma. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., 566--574. (See also Chicago J. Theor. Comput. Sci. (Dec. 1999), http://cjtcs.cs.uchicago.edu/.) Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Razborov, A. A. 1986. Lower bounds on the size of bounded depth networks over a complete basis with logical addition. Matematicheskie Zametki 41, 598--607 (in Russian). (English Translation in Mathematical Notes of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR 41, 333--338.)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Schiermeyer, I. 1993. Solving 3-satisfiability in less than 1.579n steps. In Selected papers from CSL '92. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 702. Springer-Verlag, New York, 379--394. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Schöning, U. 1999. A probabilistic algorithm for k-SAT and constraint satisfaction problems. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., 410--414. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Valiant, L. G. 1977. Graph-theoretic arguments in low-level complexity. In Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 53, Springer-Verlag, New York, 162--176.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhang, W. 1996. Number of models and satisfiability of sets of clauses. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 155, 277--288. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. An improved exponential-time algorithm for k-SAT

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image Journal of the ACM
      Journal of the ACM  Volume 52, Issue 3
      May 2005
      178 pages
      ISSN:0004-5411
      EISSN:1557-735X
      DOI:10.1145/1066100
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2005 ACM

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 1 May 2005
      Published in jacm Volume 52, Issue 3

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader