Towards Projected and Incremental Pseudo-Boolean Model Counting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Model counting is a fundamental task that involves determining the number of satisfying assignments to a logical formula, typically in conjunctive normal form (CNF). While CNF model counting has received extensive attention over recent decades, interest in Pseudo-Boolean (PB) model counting is just emerging partly due to the greater flexibility of PB formulas. As such, we observed feature gaps in existing PB counters such as a lack of support for projected and incremental settings, which could hinder adoption. In this work, our main contribution is the introduction of the PB model counter PBCount2, the first exact PB model counter with support for projected and incremental model counting. Our counter, PBCount2, uses our Least Occurrence Weighted Min Degree (LOW-MD) computation ordering heuristic to support projected model counting and a cache mechanism to enable incremental model counting. In our evaluations, PBCount2 completed at least 1.40x the number of benchmarks of competing methods for projected model counting and at least 1.18x of competing methods in incremental model counting.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".