# The Complexity of Finding Read-Once NAE-Resolution Refutations

## Abstract

In this paper, we analyze boolean formulas in conjunctive normal form (CNF) from the perspective of read-once resolution (ROR) refutation. A read-once (resolution) refutation is one in which each input clause is used at most once. It is well-known that read-once resolution is not **complete**, i.e., there exist unsatisfiable formulas for which no read-once resolution exists. Likewise, the problem of checking if a 3CNF formula has a read-once refutation is **NP-complete**. This paper is concerned with a variant of satisfiability called Not-All-Equal Satisfiability (NAE-Satisfiability). NAE-Satisfiability is the problem of checking whether an arbitrary CNF formula has a satisfying assignment in which at least one literal in each clause is set to **false**. It is well-known that NAE-satisfiability is **NP-complete**. Clearly, the class of CNF formulas which are NAE-satisfiable is a proper subset of the class of satisfiable CNF formulas. It follows that traditional resolution cannot always find a proof of NAE-unsatisfiability. Thus, traditional resolution is not a **sound** procedure for checking NAE-satisfiability. In this paper, we introduce a variant of resolution called NAE-resolution, which is a sound and complete procedure for checking NAE-satisfiability in CNF formulas. We focus on a variant of NAE-resolution called read-once NAE-resolution, in which each input clause can be part of at most one NAE-resolution step. Our principal result is that read-once NAE-resolution is a sound and complete procedure for checking the NAE-satisfiability of 2CNF formulas; we also provide a polynomial time algorithm to determine the shortest read-once NAE-resolution of a 2CNF formula. Finally, we establish that the problem of checking whether a 3CNF formula has a read-once NAE-resolution is **NP-complete**.

### Keywords

Read-once NAE-SAT Refutation Optimal length refutation### References

- 1.Beame, P., Pitassi, T.: Propositional proof complexity: past, present, future. Bull. EATCS
**65**, 66–89 (1998)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar - 2.Buss, S.R.: Propositional proof complexity: an introduction. http://www.math.ucsd.edu/~sbuss/ResearchWeb/marktoberdorf97/paper.pdf
- 3.Cook, S.A., Reckhow, R.A.: On the lengths of proofs in the propositional calculus (preliminary version). In: Proceedings of the 6th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Seattle, Washington, USA, 30 April – 2 May 1974, pp. 135–148 (1974)Google Scholar
- 4.Harrison, J.: Handbook of Practical Logic and Automated Reasoning, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 5.Iwama, K., Miyano, E.: Intractability of read-once resolution. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory (SCTC 1995), CA, USA, pp. 29–36. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, June 1995Google Scholar
- 6.Kleine Büning, H., Wojciechowski, P., Subramani, K.: On the computational complexity of read once resolution decidability in 2CNF formulas. https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.04523
- 7.Moore, C., Mertens, S.: The Nature of Computation, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2011)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 8.Papadimitriou, C.H.: Computational Complexity. Addison-Wesley, New York (1994)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 9.Robinson, J.A.: A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle. J. ACM
**12**(1), 23–41 (1965)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 10.Schaefer, T.: The complexity of satisfiability problems. In: Aho, A. (ed.) Proceedings of the 10th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 216–226. ACM Press, New York City (1978)Google Scholar
- 11.Urquhart, A.: The complexity of propositional proofs. Bull. Symbolic Logic
**1**(4), 425–467 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar