MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2398036300 · doi:10.29007/fblb

CDCL with Less Destructive Backtracking through Partial Ordering

2018· article· en· W2398036300 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEPiC series in computing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacktrackingSatisfiabilityBoolean satisfiability problemSolverRelation (database)Computer scienceSeries (stratigraphy)AlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceCombinatoricsMathematicsProgramming languageData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conflict-driven clause learning is currently the most efficient complete algorithm for satisfiability solving. However, a conflict-directed backtrack deletes potentially large portions of the current assignment that have no direct relation with the conflict. In this paper, we show that the CDCL algorithm can be generalized with a partial ordering on decision levels. This allows keeping levels that would otherwise be undone during backtracking under the usual total ordering. We implement partial ordering CDCL in a state-of-the-art CDCL solver and show that it significantly ameliorates satisfiability solving on some series of benchmarks.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.241 · 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