The interface between P and NP: COL, XOR, NAE, 1-in-k, and Horn SAT

Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Volumn , Issue , 2002, Pages 695-700

  Walsh, Toby ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; POLYNOMIALS; PROBLEM SOLVING; TREES (MATHEMATICS);

LOCAL SEARCH ALGORITHMS;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 0036928032     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Achlioptas, D.; Chtcherba, A.; Istrate, G.; and Moore, C. 2001a. The phase transition in 1-in-k SAT and NAE SAT. In Proc. of 12th Annual ACM-SIAM Symp. on Discrete Algorithms (SODA'01), 719-720.
2. Achlioptas, D.; Kirousis, L.; Kranakis, E.; and Krizanc, D. 2001b. Rigorous results for (2+p)-SAT. Theoretical Computer Science 265(1-2):109-129.
3. Achlioptas, D. 1999. Threshold phenomena in random graph colouring and satisfiability. Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept. of CS, University of Toronto.
4. Brelaz, D. 1979. New methods to color the vertices of a graph. Communications of ACM 22:251-256.
5. Cheeseman, P.; Kanefsky, B.; and Taylor, W. 1991. Where the really hard problems are. In Proc. of 12th IJCAI, 331-337.
6. Chvatal, V., and Reed, B. 1992. Mick gets some (the odds are on his side). In Proc. of 33rd Annual Symp. on Foundations of Computer Science, 620-627. IEEE.
7. Cocco, S., and Monasson, R. 2001. Trajectories in phase diagrams, growth processes and computational complexity: how search algorithms solve the 3-satisfiability problem. Phys. Rev. Letters 86(8):1654-1657.
8. Creognou, N.; Daude, H.; and Dubois, O. 2001. Approximating the satisfiability threshold for random k-XOR-formulas. Tech. Report LATP/UMR6632 01-17, Lab. d'Informatique Fondamentale de Marseille.
9. Franz, S.; Leone, M.; Ricci-Tersenghi, F.; and Zecchina, R. 2001. Exact solutions for diluted spin glasses and optimization problems. Phys. Rev. Letters 87(12):127209.
10. Goerdt, A. 1992. A theshold for unsatisfiability. In Havel, I., and Koubek, V., eds., Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, LNCS. 264-274.
11. Gomes, C., and Selman, B. 1997. Problem structure in the presence of perturbations. In Proc. of 14th National Conference on AI, 221-226.
12. Istrate, G. 2000. Dimension-dependent behavior in the satisfability of random k-Horn formulae. Tech. report, Center for Nonlinear Studies, Los Alamos National Lab. Available from http://xxx.lanl.gov/ as cs.DS/0007029.
13. Mitchell, D.; Selman, B.; and Levesque, H. 1992. Hard and Easy Distributions of SAT Problems. In Proc. of 10th National Conference on AI, 459-465.
14. Monasson, R.; Zecchina, R.; Kirkpatrick, S.; Selman, B.; and Troyansky, L. 1998. Determining computational complexity for characteristic 'phase transitions'. Nature 400:133-137.
15. Monasson, R.; Zecchina, R.; Kirkpatrick, S.; Selman, B.; and Troyansky, L. 1999. 2+p SAT: Relation of typical-case complexity to the nature of the phase transition. Random Structures and Algorithms 15(3-4):414-435.
16. Schaeffer, T. 1978. The complexity of satisfiability problems. In Proc. of 10th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computation, 216-226.
17. Singer, J.; Gent, I.; and Smaill, A. 2000. Local search on random 2+p-SAT. In Proc. of 14th ECAI.
18. Walsh, T. 1999. Search in a small world. In Proc. of 16th IJCAI.