اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدDerandomizing HSSW Algorithm for 3-SAT
497
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
We present a (full) derandomization of HSSW algorithm for 3-SAT, proposed by Hofmeister, Schoning, Schuler, and Watanabe in [STACS02]. Thereby, we obtain an O(1.3303^n)-time deterministic algorithm for 3-SAT, which is currently fastest.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
MAX NAE-SAT is a natural optimization problem, closely related to its better-known relative MAX SAT. The approximability status of MAX NAE-SAT is almost completely understood if all clauses have the same size $k$, for some $kge 2$. We refer to this p
roblem as MAX NAE-${k}$-SAT. For $k=2$, it is essentially the celebrated MAX CUT problem. For $k=3$, it is related to the MAX CUT problem in graphs that can be fractionally covered by triangles. For $kge 4$, it is known that an approximation ratio of $1-frac{1}{2^{k-1}}$, obtained by choosing a random assignment, is optimal, assuming $P e NP$. For every $kge 2$, an approximation ratio of at least $frac{7}{8}$ can be obtained for MAX NAE-${k}$-SAT. There was some hope, therefore, that there is also a $frac{7}{8}$-approximation algorithm for MAX NAE-SAT, where clauses of all sizes are allowed simultaneously. Our main result is that there is no $frac{7}{8}$-approximation algorithm for MAX NAE-SAT, assuming the unique games conjecture (UGC). In fact, even for almost satisfiable instances of MAX NAE-${3,5}$-SAT (i.e., MAX NAE-SAT where all clauses have size $3$ or $5$), the best approximation ratio that can be achieved, assuming UGC, is at most $frac{3(sqrt{21}-4)}{2}approx 0.8739$. Using calculus of variations, we extend the analysis of ODonnell and Wu for MAX CUT to MAX NAE-${3}$-SAT. We obtain an optimal algorithm, assuming UGC, for MAX NAE-${3}$-SAT, slightly improving on previous algorithms. The approximation ratio of the new algorithm is $approx 0.9089$. We complement our theoretical results with some experimental results. We describe an approximation algorithm for almost satisfiable instances of MAX NAE-${3,5}$-SAT with a conjectured approximation ratio of 0.8728, and an approximation algorithm for almost satisfiable instances of MAX NAE-SAT with a conjectured approximation ratio of 0.8698.
A noticeable fraction of Algorithms papers in the last few decades improve the running time of well-known algorithms for fundamental problems by logarithmic factors. For example, the $O(n^2)$ dynamic programming solution to the Longest Common Subsequ
ence problem (LCS) was improved to $O(n^2/log^2 n)$ in several ways and using a variety of ingenious tricks. This line of research, also known as the art of shaving log factors, lacks a tool for proving negative results. Specifically, how can we show that it is unlikely that LCS can be solved in time $O(n^2/log^3 n)$? Perhaps the only approach for such results was suggested in a recent paper of Abboud, Hansen, Vassilevska W. and Williams (STOC16). The authors blame the hardness of shaving logs on the hardness of solving satisfiability on Boolean formulas (Formula-SAT) faster than exhaustive search. They show that an $O(n^2/log^{1000} n)$ algorithm for LCS would imply a major advance in circuit lower bounds. Whether this approach can lead to tighter barriers was unclear. In this paper, we push this approach to its limit and, in particular, prove that a well-known barrier from complexity theory stands in the way for shaving five additional log factors for fundamental combinatorial problems. For LCS, regular expression pattern matching, as well as the Frechet distance problem from Computational Geometry, we show that an $O(n^2/log^{7+varepsilon} n)$ runtime would imply new Formula-SAT algorithms. Our main result is a reduction from SAT on formulas of size $s$ over $n$ variables to LCS on sequences of length $N=2^{n/2} cdot s^{1+o(1)}$. Our reduction is essentially as efficient as possible, and it greatly improves the previously known reduction for LCS with $N=2^{n/2} cdot s^c$, for some $c geq 100$.
The aim of this short note is mainly pedagogical. It summarizes some knowledge about Boolean satisfiability (SAT) and the P=NP? problem in an elementary mathematical language. A convenient scheme to visualize and manipulate CNF formulae is introduced
. Also some results like the formulae for the number of unsatisfied clauses and the number of solutions might be unknown.
X3SAT is the problem of whether one can satisfy a given set of clauses with up to three literals such that in every clause, exactly one literal is true and the others are false. A related question is to determine the maximal Hamming distance between
two solutions of the instance. Dahllof provided an algorithm for Maximum Hamming Distance XSAT, which is more complicated than the same problem for X3SAT, with a runtime of $O(1.8348^n)$; Fu, Zhou and Yin considered Maximum Hamming Distance for X3SAT and found for this problem an algorithm with runtime $O(1.6760^n)$. In this paper, we propose an algorithm in $O(1.3298^n)$ time to solve the Max Hamming Distance X3SAT problem; the algorithm actually counts for each $k$ the number of pairs of solutions which have Hamming Distance $k$.
Limits on the number of satisfying assignments for CNS instances with n variables and m clauses are derived from various inequalities. Some bounds can be calculated in polynomial time, sharper bounds demand information about the distribution of the n
umber of unsatisfied clauses. Quite generally, the number of satisfying assignments involve variance and mean of this distribution. For large formulae, m>>1, bounds vary with 2**n/n, so they may be of use only for instances with a large number of satisfying assignments.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
