Advertisement

On the Impact of Junction-Tree Topology on Weighted Model Counting

  • Batya KenigEmail author
  • Avigdor Gal
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9310)

Abstract

We present and evaluate the power of a new framework for weighted model counting and inference in graphical models, based on exploiting the topology of the junction tree representing the formula. The proposed approach uses the junction tree topology in order to craft a reduced set of partial assignments that are guaranteed to decompose the formula. We show that taking advantage of the junction tree structure, along with existing optimization methods borrowed from the CNF-SAT domain, can translate into significant time savings for weighted model counting algorithms.

Keywords

Weighted Model Counting (WMC) Junction Tree Partial Assignment DPLL-based Algorithm Valid 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.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The work was carried out in and partially supported by the Technion–Microsoft Electronic Commerce research center.

References

  1. 1.
    Bacchus, F., Dalmao, S., Pitassi, T.: Algorithms and complexity results for #sat and Bayesian inference. In: FOCS, pp. 340–351 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boutilier, C., Friedman, N., Goldszmidt, M., Koller, D.: Context-specific independence in Bayesian networks. In: UAI, pp. 115–123 (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bryant, R.E.: Symbolic Boolean manipulation with ordered binary-decision diagrams. ACM Comput. Surv. 24, 293–318 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chavira, M., Darwiche, A.: On probabilistic inference by weighted model counting. Artif. Intell. 172(6–7), 772–799 (2008)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Darwiche, A.: Decomposable negation normal form. J. ACM 48, 608–647 (2001)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Darwiche, A.: New advances in compiling CNF into decomposable negation normal form. In: ECAI, pp. 328–332 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Darwiche, A., Marquis, P.: A knowledge compilation map. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 17, 229–264 (2002)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Darwiche, P.A.: Modeling and Reasoning with Bayesian Networks, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, New York (2009)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dechter, R.: Bucket elimination: a unifying framework for reasoning. Artif. Intell. 113(1–2), 41–85 (1999)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Domshlak, C., Hoffmann, J.: Probabilistic planning via heuristic forward search and weighted model counting (2011). CoRR, abs/1111.0044
  11. 11.
    Gomes, C.P., Sabharwal, A., Selman, B.: Model counting. In: Biere, A., Heule, M., Maaren, H.V., Walsh, T. (eds.) Handbook of Satisfiability, pp. 633–654. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huang, C., Darwiche, A.: Inference in belief networks: a procedural guide. Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 15(3), 225–263 (1996)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huang, J., Darwiche, A.: DPLL with a trace: from sat to knowledge compilation. In: Kaelbling, L.P., Saffiotti, A. (eds.) IJCAI, pp. 156–162. Professional Book Center (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huang, J., Darwiche, A.: The language of search. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 29, 191–219 (2007)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hyafil, L., Rivest, R.L.: Constructing optimal binary decision trees is NP-complete. Inf. Process. Lett. 5(1), 15–17 (1976)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kjaerulff, U.: Triangulation of graphs: algorithms giving small total state space. Technical report, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, March 1990Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lauritzen, S.L., Spiegelhalter, D.J.: Readings in Uncertain Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1990)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marques Silva, J.P., Sakallah, K.A.: Conflict analysis in search algorithms for satisfiability. In: Proceedings Eighth IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 467–469. IEEE (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Muise, C.J., McIlraith, S.A., Beck, J.C., Hsu, E.I.: Dsharp: fast d-DNNF compilation with sharpsat. In: Proceedings of the Canadian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 356–361 (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sang, T., Beame, P., Kautz, H.: Heuristics for fast exact model counting. In: Bacchus, F., Walsh, T. (eds.) SAT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3569, pp. 226–240. Springer, Heidelberg (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sang, T., Beame, P., Kautz, H.A.: Performing Bayesian inference by weighted model counting. In: AAAI, pp. 475–482 (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thurley, M.: sharpSAT – counting models with advanced component caching and implicit BCP. In: Biere, A., Gomes, C.P. (eds.) SAT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4121, pp. 424–429. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Valiant, L.G.: The complexity of enumeration and reliability problems. SIAM J. Comput. 8(3), 410–421 (1979)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technion, Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations