Paper detail

Satisfiability threshold for random regular NAE-SAT

We consider the random regular $k$-NAE-SAT problem with $n$ variables each appearing in exactly $d$ clauses. For all $k$ exceeding an absolute constant $k_0$, we establish explicitly the satisfiability threshold $d_*=d_*(k)$. We prove that for $d<d_*$ the problem is satisfiable with high probability while for $d>d_*$ the problem is unsatisfiable with high probability. If the threshold $d_*$ lands exactly on an integer, we show that the problem is satisfiable with probability bounded away from both zero and one. This is the first result to locate the exact satisfiability threshold in a random constraint satisfaction problem exhibiting the condensation phenomenon identified by Krzakala et al. (2007). Our proof verifies the one-step replica symmetry breaking formalism for this model. We expect our methods to be applicable to a broad range of random constraint satisfaction problems and combinatorial problems on random graphs.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors3 topics

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 map preview

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.