Paper detail

Sparser Random 3SAT Refutation Algorithms and the Interpolation Problem

We formalize a combinatorial principle, called the 3XOR principle, due to Feige, Kim and Ofek (2006), as a family of unsatisfiable propositional formulas for which refutations of small size in any propositional proof system that possesses the feasible interpolation property imply an efficient deterministic refutation algorithm for random 3SAT with n variables and Ω(n^{1.4}) clauses. Such small size refutations would improve the state-of-the-art (with respect to the clause density) efficient refutation algorithm, which works only for Ω(n^{1.5}) many clauses (Feige and Ofek (2007)). We demonstrate polynomial-size refutations of the 3XOR principle in resolution operating with disjunctions of quadratic equations with small integer coefficients, denoted R(quad); this is a weak extension of cutting planes with small coefficients. We show that R(quad) is weakly automatizable iff R(lin) is weakly automatizable, where R(lin) is similar to R(quad) but with linear instead of quadratic equations (introduced in Raz and Tzameret (2008)). This reduces the problem of refuting random 3CNF with n variables and Ω(n^{1.4}) clauses to the interpolation problem of R(quad) and to the weak automatizability of R(lin).

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.