一句话:将 QCDCL 形式化为证明系统,证明其与 Q-归结不可比,并给出下界及可指数加速的新决策策略。
论文旨在从证明复杂度角度理解 QCDCL 求解器的能力与局限。作者将采用不同决策启发式和单元传播策略的 QCDCL 形式化为若干可靠且完备的 QBF 证明系统,并研究它们与 Q-归结的关系。结果表明,实用 QCDCL 对应的证明系统与 Q-归结通过指数分离互不可比,这与命题逻辑中 CDCL 与归结 p-等价形成鲜明对比。作者进一步给出 QCDCL 的多个下界,包括一大类随机 QBF 的指数下界,并提出一种不按量词前缀顺序决策仍能学习断言子句的强化决策策略,可使 QCDCL 在某些公式上指数加速;同时给出一个与 Q-归结 p-等价的 QCDCL 变体。
QBF solvers implementing the QCDCL paradigm are powerful algorithms that successfully tackle many computationally complex applications. However, our theoretical understanding of the strength and limitations of these QCDCL solvers is very limited. In this paper we suggest to formally model QCDCL solvers as proof systems. We define different policies that can be used for decision heuristics and unit propagation and give rise to a number of sound and complete QBF proof systems (and hence new QCDCL algorithms). With respect to the standard policies used in practical QCDCL solving, we show that the corresponding QCDCL proof system is incomparable (via exponential separations) to Q-resolution, the classical QBF resolution system used in the literature. This is in stark contrast to the propositional setting where CDCL and resolution are known to be p-equivalent. This raises the question what formulas are hard for standard QCDCL, since Q-resolution lower bounds do not necessarily apply to QCDCL as we show here. In answer to this question we prove several lower bounds for QCDCL, including exponential lower bounds for a large class of random QBFs. We also introduce a strengthening of the decision heuristic used in classical QCDCL, which does not necessarily decide variables in order of the prefix, but still allows to learn asserting clauses. We show that with this decision policy, QCDCL can be exponentially faster on some formulas. We further exhibit a QCDCL proof system that is p-equivalent to Q-resolution. In comparison to classical QCDCL, this new QCDCL version adapts both decision and unit propagation policies.
@article{paperbot2225,
title = {Understanding the Relative Strength of QBF CDCL Solvers and QBF Resolution},
author = {Olaf Beyersdorff and Benjamin Böhm},
journal = {Logical Methods in Computer Science},
volume = {Volume 19, Issue 2},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.46298/lmcs-19(2:2)2023}
}