MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105210717 · doi:10.1109/ictai.2004.67

Guiding real-world SAT solving with dynamic hypergraph separator decomposition

2005· article· en· W2105210717 on OpenAlexaff
We Li, Peter van Beek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSatisfiabilitySolverHypergraphPreprocessorComputer scienceDecompositionBoolean satisfiability problemMathematical optimizationTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmParallel computingMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The general solution of satisfiability problems is NP-complete. Although state-of-the-art SAT solvers can efficiently obtain the solutions of many real-world instances, there are still a large number of real-world SAT families which cannot be solved in reasonable time. Much effort has been spent to take advantage of the internal structure of SAT instances. Existing decomposition techniques are based on preprocessing the static structure of the original problem. We present a dynamic decomposition method based on hypergraph separators. Integrating the separator decomposition into the variable ordering of a modern SAT solver leads to speedups on large real-world satisfiability problems. Compared with a static decomposition based variable ordering, such as Dtree (Huang and Darwiche, 2003), our approach does not need time to construct the full tree decomposition, which sometimes needs more time than the solving process itself. Our primary focus is to achieve speedups on large real-world satisfiability problems. Our results show that the new solver often outperforms both regular zChaff and zChaff integrated with Dtree decomposition. The dynamic separator decomposition shows promise in that it significantly decreases the number of decisions for some real-world problems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207