Structure and Problem Hardness: Goal Asymmetry and DPLL Proofs in<br> SAT-Based Planning

In Verification and in (optimal) AI Planning, a successful method is to formulate the application as boolean satisfiability (SAT), and solve it with state-of-the-art DPLL-based procedures. There is a lack of understanding of why this works so well. Focussing on the Planning context, we identify a form of problem structure concerned with the symmetrical or asymmetrical nature of the cost of achieving the individual planning goals. We quantify this sort of structure with a simple numeric parameter called AsymRatio, ranging between 0 and 1. We run experiments in 10 benchmark domains from the International Planning Competitions since 2000; we show that AsymRatio is a good indicator of SAT solver performance in 8 of these domains. We then examine carefully crafted synthetic planning domains that allow control of the amount of structure, and that are clean enough for a rigorous analysis of the combinatorial search space. The domains are parameterized by size, and by the amount of structure. The CNFs we examine are unsatisfiable, encoding one planning step less than the length of the optimal plan. We prove upper and lower bounds on the size of the best possible DPLL refutations, under different settings of the amount of structure, as a function of size. We also identify the best possible sets of branching variables (backdoors). With minimum AsymRatio, we prove exponential lower bounds, and identify minimal backdoors of size linear in the number of variables. With maximum AsymRatio, we identify logarithmic DPLL refutations (and backdoors), showing a doubly exponential gap between the two structural extreme cases. The reasons for this behavior -- the proof arguments -- illuminate the prototypical patterns of structure causing the empirical behavior observed in the competition benchmarks

Paradigms for Parameterized Enumeration

The aim of the paper is to examine the computational complexity and algorithmics of enumeration, the task to output all solutions of a given problem, from the point of view of parameterized complexity. First we define formally different notions of efficient enumeration in the context of parameterized complexity. Second we show how different algorithmic paradigms can be used in order to get parameter-efficient enumeration algorithms in a number of examples. These paradigms use well-known principles from the design of parameterized decision as well as enumeration techniques, like for instance kernelization and self-reducibility. The concept of kernelization, in particular, leads to a characterization of fixed-parameter tractable enumeration problems.Comment: Accepted for MFCS 2013; long version of the pape

Differentially-Private Decision Trees with Probabilistic Robustness to Data Poisoning

Decision trees are interpretable models that are well-suited to non-linear learning problems. Much work has been done on extending decision tree learning algorithms with differential privacy, a system that guarantees the privacy of samples within the training data. However, current state-of-the-art algorithms for this purpose sacrifice much utility for a small privacy benefit. These solutions create random decision nodes that reduce decision tree accuracy or spend an excessive share of the privacy budget on labeling leaves. Moreover, many works do not support or leak information about feature values when data is continuous. We propose a new method called PrivaTree based on private histograms that chooses good splits while consuming a small privacy budget. The resulting trees provide a significantly better privacy-utility trade-off and accept mixed numerical and categorical data without leaking additional information. Finally, while it is notoriously hard to give robustness guarantees against data poisoning attacks, we prove bounds for the expected success rates of backdoor attacks against differentially-private learners. Our experimental results show that PrivaTree consistently outperforms previous works on predictive accuracy and significantly improves robustness against backdoor attacks compared to regular decision trees

Limits of Preprocessing

We present a first theoretical analysis of the power of polynomial-time preprocessing for important combinatorial problems from various areas in AI. We consider problems from Constraint Satisfaction, Global Constraints, Satisfiability, Nonmonotonic and Bayesian Reasoning. We show that, subject to a complexity theoretic assumption, none of the considered problems can be reduced by polynomial-time preprocessing to a problem kernel whose size is polynomial in a structural problem parameter of the input, such as induced width or backdoor size. Our results provide a firm theoretical boundary for the performance of polynomial-time preprocessing algorithms for the considered problems.Comment: This is a slightly longer version of a paper that appeared in the proceedings of AAAI 201

An Atypical Survey of Typical-Case Heuristic Algorithms

Heuristic approaches often do so well that they seem to pretty much always give the right answer. How close can heuristic algorithms get to always giving the right answer, without inducing seismic complexity-theoretic consequences? This article first discusses how a series of results by Berman, Buhrman, Hartmanis, Homer, Longpr\'{e}, Ogiwara, Sch\"{o}ening, and Watanabe, from the early 1970s through the early 1990s, explicitly or implicitly limited how well heuristic algorithms can do on NP-hard problems. In particular, many desirable levels of heuristic success cannot be obtained unless severe, highly unlikely complexity class collapses occur. Second, we survey work initiated by Goldreich and Wigderson, who showed how under plausible assumptions deterministic heuristics for randomized computation can achieve a very high frequency of correctness. Finally, we consider formal ways in which theory can help explain the effectiveness of heuristics that solve NP-hard problems in practice.Comment: This article is currently scheduled to appear in the December 2012 issue of SIGACT New