MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2240863283

New Encoding for Translating Pseudo-Boolean Constraints into SAT.

2013· article· en· W2240863283 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Aavani, David G. M. Mitchell, Eugenia Ternovska

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium on Abstraction, Reformulation and Approximation · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstraint (computer-aided design)Conjunctive normal formConstraint satisfaction problemLocal consistencyComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Boolean data typePropositional calculusPropositional formulaSet (abstract data type)Transformation (genetics)Boolean functionPropositional variableTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsProgramming languageArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Pseudo-Boolean (PB) constraint is a linear arithmetic constraint over Boolean variables. PB constraints are and widely used in declarative languages for expressing NP-hard search problems. While there are solvers for sets of PB constraints, there are also reasons to be interested in transforming these to propositional CNF formulas, and a number of methods for doing this have been reported. We introduce a new, two-step, method for transforming PB constraints to propositional CNF formulas. The first step re-writes each PB constraint as a conjunction of PB-Mod constraints, and the second transforms each PB-Mod constraint to CNF. The resulting CNF formulas are compact, and make effective use of unit propagation, in that unit propagation can derive facts from these CNF formulas which it cannot derive from the CNF formulas produced by other commonlyused transformation. We present a preliminary experimental evaluation of the method, using instances of the number partitioning problem as a benchmark set, which indicates that our method out-performs other transformations to CNF when the coefficients of the PB constraints are not small.

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymposium on Abstraction, Reformulation and ApproximationSame topicConstraint Satisfaction and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207