On the Exact Complexity of Evaluating Quantified k -CNF

Abstract

We relate the exponential complexities 2^s(k)n of $\textsc {$k$-sat}$ and the exponential complexity $2^{s(\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf}))n}$ of $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ (the problem of evaluating quantified formulas of the form $\forall\vec{x} \exists\vec{y} \textsc {F}(\vec {x},\vec{y})$ where F is a 3-cnf in $\vec{x}$ variables and $\vec{y}$ variables) and show that s(∞) (the limit of s(k) as k→∞) is at most $s(\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf}))$. Therefore, if we assume the Strong Exponential-Time Hypothesis, then there is no algorithm for $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ running in time 2^cn with c<1. On the other hand, a nontrivial exponential-time algorithm for $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ would provide a $\textsc {$k$-sat}$ solver with better exponent than all current algorithms for sufficiently large k. We also show several syntactic restrictions of the evaluation problem $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ have nontrivial algorithms, and provide strong evidence that the hardest cases of $\textsc {eval}(\mathrm {\varPi }_{2} 3\textsc {-cnf})$ must have a mixture of clauses of two types: one universally quantified literal and two existentially quantified literals, or only existentially quantified literals. Moreover, the hardest cases must have at least n−o(n) universally quantified variables, and hence only o(n) existentially quantified variables. Our proofs involve the construction of efficient minimally unsatisfiable $\textsc {$k$-cnf}$s and the application of the Sparsification lemma.