Proof Complexity and Beyond

Proof complexity is a multi-disciplinary intellectual endeavor that addresses questions of the general form “how difficult is it to prove certain mathematical facts?” The current workshop focused on recent advances in our understanding of logic-based proof systems and on connections to algorithms, geometry and combinatorics research, such as the analysis of approximation algorithms, or the size of linear or semidefinite programming formulations of combinatorial optimization problems, to name just two important examples

Constraint Satisfaction Techniques for Combinatorial Problems

The last two decades have seen extraordinary advances in tools and techniques for constraint satisfaction. These advances have in turn created great interest in their industrial applications. As a result, tools and techniques are often tailored to meet the needs of industrial applications out of the box. We claim that in the case of abstract combinatorial problems in discrete mathematics, the standard tools and techniques require special considerations in order to be applied effectively. The main objective of this thesis is to help researchers in discrete mathematics weave through the landscape of constraint satisfaction techniques in order to pick the right tool for the job. We consider constraint satisfaction paradigms like satisfiability of Boolean formulas and answer set programming, and techniques like symmetry breaking. Our contributions range from theoretical results to practical issues regarding tool applications to combinatorial problems. We prove search-versus-decision complexity results for problems about backbones and backdoors of Boolean formulas. We consider applications of constraint satisfaction techniques to problems in graph arrowing (specifically in Ramsey and Folkman theory) and computational social choice. Our contributions show how applying constraint satisfaction techniques to abstract combinatorial problems poses additional challenges. We show how these challenges can be addressed. Additionally, we consider the issue of trusting the results of applying constraint satisfaction techniques to combinatorial problems by relying on verified computations

sunny-as2: Enhancing SUNNY for Algorithm Selection

SUNNY is an Algorithm Selection (AS) technique originally tailored for Constraint Programming (CP). SUNNY enables to schedule, from a portfolio of solvers, a subset of solvers to be run on a given CP problem. This approach has proved to be effective for CP problems, and its parallel version won many gold medals in the Open category of the MiniZinc Challenge -- the yearly international competition for CP solvers. In 2015, the ASlib benchmarks were released for comparing AS systems coming from disparate fields (e.g., ASP, QBF, and SAT) and SUNNY was extended to deal with generic AS problems. This led to the development of sunny-as2, an algorithm selector based on SUNNY for ASlib scenarios. A preliminary version of sunny-as2 was submitted to the Open Algorithm Selection Challenge (OASC) in 2017, where it turned out to be the best approach for the runtime minimization of decision problems. In this work, we present the technical advancements of sunny-as2, including: (i) wrapper-based feature selection; (ii) a training approach combining feature selection and neighbourhood size configuration; (iii) the application of nested cross-validation. We show how sunny-as2 performance varies depending on the considered AS scenarios, and we discuss its strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we also show how sunny-as2 improves on its preliminary version submitted to OASC

Why CP Portfolio Solvers Are (under)Utilized? Issues and Challenges

International audienceIt is well recognized that a single, arbitrarily efficient solver can be significantly outperformed by a portfolio solver exploiting a combination of possibly slower on-average different solvers. Despite the success of portfolio solvers within the context of solving competitions, they are rarely used in practice. In this paper we give an overview of the main limitations that hinder the practical adoption and development of portfolio solvers within the Constraint Programming (CP) paradigm, discussing also possible ways to overcome them and potential extensions outside the CP field

SUNNY: a Lazy Portfolio Approach for Constraint Solving

*** To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) *** Within the context of constraint solving, a portfolio approach allows one to exploit the synergy between different solvers in order to create a globally better solver. In this paper we present SUNNY: a simple and flexible algorithm that takes advantage of a portfolio of constraint solvers in order to compute --- without learning an explicit model --- a schedule of them for solving a given Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP). Motivated by the performance reached by SUNNY vs. different simulations of other state of the art approaches, we developed sunny-csp, an effective portfolio solver that exploits the underlying SUNNY algorithm in order to solve a given CSP. Empirical tests conducted on exhaustive benchmarks of MiniZinc models show that the actual performance of SUNNY conforms to the predictions. This is encouraging both for improving the power of CSP portfolio solvers and for trying to export them to fields such as Answer Set Programming and Constraint Logic Programming

Metareasoning about propagators for constraint satisfaction

Given the breadth of constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs) and the wide variety of CSP solvers, it is often very difficult to determine a priori which solving method is best suited to a problem. This work explores the use of machine learning to predict which solving method will be most effective for a given problem. We use four different problem sets to determine the CSP attributes that can be used to determine which solving method should be applied. After choosing an appropriate set of attributes, we determine how well j48 decision trees can predict which solving method to apply. Furthermore, we take a cost sensitive approach such that problem instances where there is a great difference in runtime between algorithms are emphasized. We also attempt to use information gained on one class of problems to inform decisions about a second class of problems. Finally, we show that the additional costs of deciding which method to apply are outweighed by the time savings compared to applying the same solving method to all problem instances

Reasons for Hardness in QBF Proof Complexity

Quantified Boolean Formulas (QBF) extend the canonical NP-complete satisfiability problem by including Boolean quantifiers. Determining the truth of a QBF is PSPACE-complete; this is expected to be a harder problem than satisfiability, and hence QBF solving has much wider applications in practice. QBF proof complexity forms the theoretical basis for understanding QBF solving, as well as providing insights into more general complexity theory, but is less well understood than propositional proof complexity. We begin this thesis by looking at the reasons underlying QBF hardness, and in particular when the hardness is propositional in nature, rather than arising due to the quantifiers. We introduce relaxing QU-Res, a previous model for identifying such propositional hardness, and construct an example where relaxing QU-Res is unsuccessful in this regard. We then provide a new model for identifying such hardness which we prove captures this concept. Now equipped with a means of identifying ‘genuine’ QBF hardness, we prove a new lower bound technique for tree-like QBF proof systems. Lower bounds using this technique allows us to show a new separation between tree-like and dag-like systems. We give a characterisation of lower bounds for a large class of tree-like proof systems, in which such lower bounds play a prominent role. Further to the tree-like bound, we provide a new lower bound technique for QBF proof systems in general. This technique has some similarities to the above technique for tree-like systems, but requires some refinement to provide bounds for dag-like systems. We give applications of this new technique by proving lower bounds across several systems. The first such lower bounds are for a very simple family of QBFs. We then provide a construction to combine false QBFs to give formulas for which we can show lower bounds in this way, allowing the generation of the first random QBF proof complexity lower bounds

Results on Extensions of the Satisfability Problem

The satisfiability problem (SAT) and its extensions have become indispensible tools in artificial intelligence, verification, and many other domains. Extensions of the problem such as model counting, quantified Boolean formulae (QBF), and MAX-SAT have similarly seen increased study and applications. This thesis provides a survey on SAT, and then presents novel results related to model counting and random QBF. Chapter 3 gives a general technique for computing inclusion-exclusion sums more efficiently for the purpose of model counting. The main contribution is a subsumption technique which reduces computational overhead. Treating an inclusion-exclusion sum's computation as tree exploration, subsumption allows us to prune large subtrees. We also give a better worst-case upper bound on the algorithm's running time, improving it from exponential in the number of clauses to the number of variables in a CNF formula. Chapter 5 describes a new phase transition in random QBF, along with related results on random QBF models. The clause-to-variable ratio phase transition identified in random $k$-SAT has been the subject of intense study on what makes a SAT instance intractable, and recent work has studied a similar transition in random QBF. Here we show that a satisfiability threshold exists around phase transitions arising from altering the fraction of existentially versus universally quantified variables in a formula. In chapter 6 we revisit work on generating trivially false formulas in several related random QBF models, giving precise bounds for how likely they are to occur

On the relationship between satisfiability and partially observable Markov decision processes

Stochastic satisfiability (SSAT), Quantified Boolean Satisfiability (QBF) and decision-theoretic planning in finite horizon partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs) are all PSPACE-Complete problems. Since they are all complete for the same complexity class, I show how to convert them into one another in polynomial time and space. I discuss various properties of each encoding and how they get translated into equivalent constructs in the other encodings. An important lesson of these reductions is that the states in SSAT and flat POMDPs do not match. Therefore, comparing the scalability of satisfiability and flat POMDP solvers based on the size of the state spaces they can tackle is misleading. A new SSAT solver called SSAT-Prime is proposed and implemented. It includes improvements to watch literals, component caching and detecting symmetries with upper and lower bounds under certain conditions. SSAT-Prime is compared against a state of the art solver for probabilistic inference and a native POMDP solver on challenging benchmarks