Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 7962))

Abstract

Reductions are perhaps the most useful tool in complexity theory and, naturally, it is in general undecidable to determine whether a reduction exists between two given decision problems. However, asking for a reduction on inputs of bounded size is essentially a \(\Sigma^p_2\) problem and can in principle be solved by ASP, QBF, or by iterated calls to SAT solvers. We describe our experiences developing and benchmarking automatic reduction finders. We created a dedicated reduction finder that does counter-example guided abstraction refinement by iteratively calling either a SAT solver or BDD package. We benchmark its performance with different SAT solvers and report the tradeoffs between the SAT and BDD approaches. Further, we compare this reduction finder with the direct approach using a number of QBF and ASP solvers. We describe the tradeoffs between the QBF and ASP approaches and show which solvers perform best on our \(\Sigma^p_2\) instances. It turns out that even state-of-the-art solvers leave a large room for improvement on problems of this kind. We thus provide our instances as a benchmark for future work on \(\Sigma^p_2\) solvers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allender, E., Balcázar, J.L., Immerman, N.: A first-order isomorphism theorem. SIAM J. Comput. 26(2), 539–556 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement for symbolic model checking. J. ACM 50(5), 752–794 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Crouch, M., Immerman, N., Moss, J.E.B.: Finding reductions automatically. In: Blass, A., Dershowitz, N., Reisig, W. (eds.) Fields of Logic and Computation. LNCS, vol. 6300, pp. 181–200. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Eiter, T., Gottlob, G.: On the computational cost of disjunctive logic programming: Propositional case. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 15(3-4), 289–323 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Faber, W., Ricca, F.: Solving hard ASP programs efficiently. In: Baral, C., Greco, G., Leone, N., Terracina, G. (eds.) LPNMR 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3662, pp. 240–252. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Fagin, R.: Generalized first-order spectra and polynomial-time recognizable sets. In: Complexity of Computation, SIAM-AMS Proceedings, vol. 7, pp. 43–73. Amer. Mathematical Soc. (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gold, E.: Language identification in the limit. Inform. Control 10(5), 447–474 (1967)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Grädel, E., Kolaitis, P.G., Libkin, L., Marx, M., Spencer, J., Vardi, M.Y., Venema, Y., Weinstein, S.: Finite Model Theory and Its Applications. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. Springer (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Grohe, M.: Fixed-point logics on planar graphs. In: Proc. of LICS 1998, pp. 6–15. IEEE Computer Society (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Grohe, M.: Fixed-point definability and polynomial time on graphs with excluded minors. J. ACM 59(5), 27:1–27:64 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Immerman, N.: Relational queries computable in polynomial time. Inform. Control 68, 86–104 (1986)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Immerman, N.: Languages that capture complexity classes. SIAM J. Comput. 16(4), 760–778 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Immerman, N.: Descriptive Complexity. Springer (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Janota, M., Klieber, W., Marques-Silva, J., Clarke, E.: Solving QBF with counterexample guided refinement. In: Cimatti, A., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) SAT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7317, pp. 114–128. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Janota, M., Marques-Silva, J.: Abstraction-based algorithm for 2QBF. In: Sakallah, K.A., Simon, L. (eds.) SAT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6695, pp. 230–244. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Leone, N., Pfeifer, G., Faber, W., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Perri, S., Scarcello, F.: The DLV system for knowledge representation and reasoning. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 7(3), 499–562 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Peschiera, C., Pulina, L., Tacchella, A., Bubeck, U., Kullmann, O., Lynce, I.: The seventh QBF solvers evaluation (QBFEVAL’10). In: Strichman, O., Szeider, S. (eds.) SAT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6175, pp. 237–250. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Vardi, M.Y.: The complexity of relational query languages. In: Proc. of STOC 1982, pp. 137–146. ACM (1982)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Jordan, C., Kaiser, Ł. (2013). Experiments with Reduction Finding. In: Järvisalo, M., Van Gelder, A. (eds) Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing – SAT 2013. SAT 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7962. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39071-5_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39071-5_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-39070-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-39071-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics