MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W39832950

An Exponential Time/Space Speedup For Resolution

2007· article· en· W39832950 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

VenueElectronic colloquium on computational complexity · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResolution (logic)DPLL algorithmSatisfiabilitySpeedupHeuristicsBottleneckPSPACEMathematical proofHeuristicProof complexitySpace (punctuation)Computer scienceMathematicsAlgorithmConjunctive normal formAutomated theorem provingExponential functionDiscrete mathematicsComputational complexity theoryMathematical optimizationParallel computingArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Satisfiability algorithms have become one of the most practi cal and successful approaches for solving a variety of real-world problems, including hardware verifi cation, experimental design, planning and diagnosis problems. The main reason for the success is due to highly optimized algorithms for SAT based on resolution. The most successful of these is clause learning, a DPLL scheme based on caching intermediate clauses that are “learned” throughout the backtrack search procedure. The main bottleneck to this approach is space, and thus there has been a tremendous amount of research aimed at identifying good heuristics for deciding what information to cache. Haken first suggested a formal approach to this issue, and Ben-Sasson [3] posed the question of whether there is a time/space tradeoff for resolution. Our main result is an optimal time/space tradeoff for resolution. Namely, we present an infinite family of propositional formulas whose minimal space proofs all have exponential time, but if just three extra units of storage are allowed, then the formulas can be proved in linear time. We also prove another related theorem. Given an unsatisfiabl e formula F and an integer k, the resolution space problem is to determine if F has a resolution proof which can be verified using space k. We prove that this problem is PSPACE complete.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.272 · 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