Structure-Guided Automated Reasoning
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866917886842372096 |
|---|---|
| author | Bannach, Max Hecher, Markus |
| author_facet | Bannach, Max Hecher, Markus |
| contents | Algorithmic meta-theorems state that problems definable in a fixed logic can be solved efficiently on structures with certain properties. An example is Courcelle's Theorem, which states that all problems expressible in monadic second-order logic can be solved efficiently on structures of small treewidth. Such theorems are usually proven by algorithms for the model-checking problem of the logic, which is often complex and rarely leads to highly efficient solutions. Alternatively, we can solve the model-checking problem by grounding the given logic to propositional logic, for which dedicated solvers are available. Such encodings will, however, usually not preserve the input's treewidth.
This paper investigates whether all problems definable in monadic second-order logic can efficiently be encoded into \Lang{sat} such that the input's treewidth bounds the treewidth of the resulting formula. We answer this in the affirmative and, hence, provide an alternative proof of Courcelle's Theorem. Our technique can naturally be extended: There are treewidth-aware reductions from the optimization version of Courcelle's Theorem to MaxSAT and from the counting version of the theorem to \#SAT. By using encodings to SAT, we obtain, ignoring polynomial factors, the same running time for the model-checking problem as we would with dedicated algorithms. Another immediate consequence is a treewidth-preserving reduction from the model-checking problem of monadic second-order logic to integer linear programming (ILP). We complement our upper bounds with new lower bounds based on ETH; and we show that the block size of the input's formula and the treewidth of the input's structure are tightly linked. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2312_14620 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2023 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Structure-Guided Automated Reasoning Bannach, Max Hecher, Markus Logic in Computer Science Computational Complexity F.4.1; F.2.0 Algorithmic meta-theorems state that problems definable in a fixed logic can be solved efficiently on structures with certain properties. An example is Courcelle's Theorem, which states that all problems expressible in monadic second-order logic can be solved efficiently on structures of small treewidth. Such theorems are usually proven by algorithms for the model-checking problem of the logic, which is often complex and rarely leads to highly efficient solutions. Alternatively, we can solve the model-checking problem by grounding the given logic to propositional logic, for which dedicated solvers are available. Such encodings will, however, usually not preserve the input's treewidth. This paper investigates whether all problems definable in monadic second-order logic can efficiently be encoded into \Lang{sat} such that the input's treewidth bounds the treewidth of the resulting formula. We answer this in the affirmative and, hence, provide an alternative proof of Courcelle's Theorem. Our technique can naturally be extended: There are treewidth-aware reductions from the optimization version of Courcelle's Theorem to MaxSAT and from the counting version of the theorem to \#SAT. By using encodings to SAT, we obtain, ignoring polynomial factors, the same running time for the model-checking problem as we would with dedicated algorithms. Another immediate consequence is a treewidth-preserving reduction from the model-checking problem of monadic second-order logic to integer linear programming (ILP). We complement our upper bounds with new lower bounds based on ETH; and we show that the block size of the input's formula and the treewidth of the input's structure are tightly linked. |
| title | Structure-Guided Automated Reasoning |
| topic | Logic in Computer Science Computational Complexity F.4.1; F.2.0 |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.14620 |