Paper detail

Generalising unit-refutation completeness and SLUR via nested input resolution

We introduce two hierarchies of clause-sets, SLUR_k and UC_k, based on the classes SLUR (Single Lookahead Unit Refutation), introduced in 1995, and UC (Unit refutation Complete), introduced in 1994. The class SLUR, introduced in [Annexstein et al, 1995], is the class of clause-sets for which unit-clause-propagation (denoted by r_1) detects unsatisfiability, or where otherwise iterative assignment, avoiding obviously false assignments by look-ahead, always yields a satisfying assignment. It is natural to consider how to form a hierarchy based on SLUR. Such investigations were started in [Cepek et al, 2012] and [Balyo et al, 2012]. We present what we consider the &#34;limit hierarchy&#34; SLUR_k, based on generalising r_1 by r_k, that is, using generalised unit-clause-propagation introduced in [Kullmann, 1999, 2004]. The class UC, studied in [Del Val, 1994], is the class of Unit refutation Complete clause-sets, that is, those clause-sets for which unsatisfiability is decidable by r_1 under any falsifying assignment. For unsatisfiable clause-sets F, the minimum k such that r_k determines unsatisfiability of F is exactly the &#34;hardness&#34; of F, as introduced in [Ku 99, 04]. For satisfiable F we use now an extension mentioned in [Ansotegui et al, 2008]: The hardness is the minimum k such that after application of any falsifying partial assignments, r_k determines unsatisfiability. The class UC_k is given by the clause-sets which have hardness <= k. We observe that UC_1 is exactly UC. UC_k has a proof-theoretic character, due to the relations between hardness and tree-resolution, while SLUR_k has an algorithmic character. The correspondence between r_k and k-times nested input resolution (or tree resolution using clause-space k+1) means that r_k has a dual nature: both algorithmic and proof theoretic. This corresponds to a basic result of this paper, namely SLUR_k = UC_k.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.