MaxSAT Resolution and Subcube Sums

We study the MaxRes rule in the context of certifying unsatisfiability. We show that it can be exponentially more powerful than tree-like resolution, and when augmented with weakening (the system MaxResW), p-simulates tree-like resolution. In devising a lower bound technique specific to MaxRes (and not merely inheriting lower bounds from Res), we define a new proof system called the SubCubeSums proof system. This system, which p-simulates MaxResW, can be viewed as a special case of the semialgebraic Sherali-Adams proof system. In expressivity, it is the integral restriction of conical juntas studied in the contexts of communication complexity and extension complexity. We show that it is not simulated by Res. Using a proof technique qualitatively different from the lower bounds that MaxResW inherits from Res, we show that Tseitin contradictions on expander graphs are hard to refute in SubCubeSums. We also establish a lower bound technique via lifting: for formulas requiring large degree in SubCubeSums, their XOR-ification requires large size in SubCubeSums

MaxSAT Evaluation 2018 : Solver and Benchmark Descriptions

Non peer reviewe

MaxSAT Evaluation 2018 : New Developments and Detailed Results

Peer reviewe

Equivalence Between Systems Stronger Than Resolution

In recent years there has been an increasing interest in studying proof systems stronger than Resolution, with the aim of building more efficient SAT solvers based on them. In defining these proof systems, we try to find a balance between the power of the proof system (the size of the proofs required to refute a formula) and the difficulty of finding the proofs. Among those proof systems we can mention Circular Resolution, MaxSAT Resolution with Extensions and MaxSAT Resolution with the Dual-Rail encoding. In this paper we study the relative power of those proof systems from a theoretical perspective. We prove that Circular Resolution and MaxSAT Resolution with extension are polynomially equivalent proof systems. This result is generalized to arbitrary sets of inference rules with proof constructions based on circular graphs or based on weighted clauses. We also prove that when we restrict the Split rule (that both systems use) to bounded size clauses, these two restricted systems are also equivalent. Finally, we show the relationship between these two restricted systems and Dual-Rail MaxSAT Resolution.Research partially supported by the EU H2020 Research and Innovation Programme under the LOGISTAR project (Grant Agreement No. 769142), the MINECO-FEDER project TASSAT3 (TIN2016-76573-C2-2-P) and the MICINN project PROOFS (PID2019-109137GB-C21)