Can sat be solved in “moderately exponential” time, i.e., in time p(|F|) 2 cn for some polynomial p and some constant c < 1, where F is a CNF formula of size |F| over n variables? This challenging question is far from being resolved. In this paper, we relate the question of moderately exponential complexity of sat to the question of moderately exponential complexity of problems defined by existential second-order sentences. Namely, we extend the class SNP (Strict NP) that consists of Boolean queries defined by existential second-order sentences where the first-order part has a universal prefix. The extension is obtained by allowing a ∀ ... ∀ ∃ ... ∃ prefix in the first-order part. We prove that if sat can be solved in moderately exponential time then all problems in the extended class can also be solved in moderately exponential time.


Parameterized Problem Exponential Time Relation Symbol Instance Size Exponential Complexity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [AS03]
    Arvind, V., Schuler, R.: The quantum query complexity of 0-1 knapsack and associated claw problems. In: Ibaraki, T., Katoh, N., Ono, H. (eds.) ISAAC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2906, pp. 168–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [CIP06]
    Calabro, C., Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R.: A duality between clause width and clause density for SAT. In: Proceedings of the 21st Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, CCC 2006, pp. 252–260. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  3. [CIP09]
    Calabro, C., Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R.: The complexity of satisfiability of small depth circuits. In: IWPEC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5917, pp. 75–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  4. [CP09]
    Calabro, C., Paturi, R.: k-SAT is no harder than Decision-Unique-k-SAT. In: Frid, A., Morozov, A., Rybalchenko, A., Wagner, K.W. (eds.) Computer Science - Theory and Applications. LNCS, vol. 5675, pp. 59–70. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [DGH+02]
    Dantsin, E., Goerdt, A., Hirsch, E.A., Kannan, R., Kleinberg, J., Papadimitriou, C.H., Raghavan, P., Schöning, U.: A deterministic (2 − 2/(k + 1))n algorithm for k-SAT based on local search. Theoretical Computer Science 289(1), 69–83 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. [DH09]
    Dantsin, E., Hirsch, E.A.: Worst-case upper bounds. In: Handbook of Satisfiability, ch. 12, pp. 403–424. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2009)Google Scholar
  7. [Fag74]
    Fagin, R.: Generalized first-order spectra and polynomial-time recognizable sets. In: Karp, R. (ed.) Complexity of Computation, SIAM–AMS Proceedings, vol. 7, pp. 27–41. AMS, Providence (1974)Google Scholar
  8. [Imm99]
    Immerman, N.: Descriptive Complexity. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. [IP01]
    Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R.: On the complexity of k-SAT. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 62(2), 367–375 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. [IPZ01]
    Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R., Zane, F.: Which problems have strongly exponential complexity. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 63(4), 512–530 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. [KV87]
    Kolaitis, P.G., Vardi, M.Y.: The decision problem for the probabilities of higher-order properties. In: Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 1987, pp. 425–435. ACM, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  12. [Mar07]
    Marx, D.: Can you beat treewidth? In: Proceedings of the 48th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2007, pp. 169–179 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. [Pap94]
    Papadimitriou, C.H.: Computational Complexity. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. [PP09]
    Paturi, R., Pudlák, P.: On the complexity of circuit satisfiability (2009),
  15. [PPSZ98]
    Paturi, R., Pudlák, P., Saks, M.E., Zane, F.: An improved exponential-time algorithm for k-SAT. In: Proceedings of the 39th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 1998, pp. 628–637 (1998)Google Scholar
  16. [PY91]
    Papadimitriou, C.H., Yannakakis, M.: Optimization, approximation and complexity classes. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 43, 425–440 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. [Sch99]
    Schöning, U.: A probabilistic algorithm for k-SAT and constraint satisfaction problems. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 1999, pp. 410–414 (1999)Google Scholar
  18. [Tra08]
    Traxler, P.: The time complexity of constraint satisfaction. In: Grohe, M., Niedermeier, R. (eds.) IWPEC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5018, pp. 190–201. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [Wil07]
    Williams, R.: Algorithms and resource requirements for fundamental problems. PhD thesis, Carnegie-Melon University (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evgeny Dantsin
    • 1
  • Alexander Wolpert
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceRoosevelt UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations