Advertisement

Breaking the PPSZ Barrier for Unique 3-SAT

  • Timon Hertli
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8572)

Abstract

The PPSZ algorithm by Paturi, Pudlák, Saks, and Zane (FOCS 1998) is the fastest known algorithm for (Promise) Unique k-SAT. We give an improved algorithm with exponentially faster bounds for Unique 3-SAT.

For uniquely satisfiable 3-CNF formulas, we do the following case distinction: We call a clause critical if exactly one literal is satisfied by the unique satisfying assignment. If a formula has many critical clauses, we observe that PPSZ by itself is already faster. If there are only few clauses in total, we use an algorithm by Wahlström (ESA 2005) that is faster than PPSZ in this case. Otherwise we have a formula with few critical and many non-critical clauses. Non-critical clauses have at least two literals satisfied; we show how to exploit this to improve PPSZ.

Keywords

Success Probability Randomized Algorithm Satisfying Assignment Promise Problem Satisfying Truth Assignment 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hamza, K.: The smallest uniform upper bound on the distance between the mean and the median of the binomial and poisson distributions. Statistics & Probability Letters 23(1), 21–25 (1995)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hertli, T.: 3-SAT faster and simpler—unique-SAT bounds for PPSZ hold in general. In: 2011 IEEE 52nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2011, pp. 277–284. IEEE Computer Soc., Los Alamitos (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R., Zane, F.: Which problems have strongly exponential complexity. J. Comput. System Sci. 63(4), 512–530 (2001); Special issue on FOCS 1998 (Palo Alto, CA)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Iwama, K., Tamaki, S.: Improved upper bounds for 3-SAT. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithm, pp. 328–329 (electronic). ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    MacWilliams, F.F.J., Sloane, N.N.J.A.: The Theory of Error-Correcting Codes. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1977)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Paturi, R., Pudlák, P., Saks, M.E., Zane, F.: An improved exponential-time algorithm for k-SAT. J. ACM 52(3), 337–364 (electronic) (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schöning, U.: A probabilistic algorithm for k-SAT and constraint satisfaction problems. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 410–414. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wahlström, M.: An algorithm for the SAT problem for formulae of linear length. In: Brodal, G.S., Leonardi, S. (eds.) ESA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3669, pp. 107–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Welzl, E.: Boolean Satisfiability – Combinatorics and Algorithms (Lecture Notes) (2005), www.inf.ethz.ch/~emo/SmallPieces/SAT.ps

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timon Hertli
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Theoretical Computer Science, Department of Computer ScienceETH ZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations