Solving #SAT and Bayesian Inference with Backtracking Search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inference in Bayes Nets (BAYES) is an important problem with numerous applications in probabilistic reasoning. Counting the number of satisfying assignments of a propositional formula (#SAT) is a closely related problem of fundamental theoretical importance. Both these problems, and others, are members of the class of sum-of-products (SUMPROD) problems. In this paper we show that standard backtracking search when augmented with a simple memoization scheme (caching) can solve any sum-of-products problem with time complexity that is at least as good any other state-of-the-art exact algorithm, and that it can also achieve the best known time-space tradeoff. Furthermore, backtrackings ability to utilize more flexible variable orderings allows us to prove that it can achieve an exponential speedup over other standard algorithms for SUMPROD on some instances. The ideas presented here have been utilized in a number of solvers that have been applied to various types of sum-of-product problems. These systems have exploited the fact that backtracking can naturally exploit more of the problems structure to achieve improved performance on a range of probleminstances. Empirical evidence of this performance gain has appeared in published works describing these solvers, and we provide references to these works.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".