How good are branching rules in DPLL?

Discrete Applied Mathematics

Volumn 89, Issue 1-3, 1998, Pages 281-286

  Ouyang, Ming ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Branching rules; DPLL

Indexed keywords

EID: 0043080078     PISSN: 0166218X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0166-218X(98)00045-6     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. M. Davis, G. Logemann, D. Loveland, A machine program for theorem-proving, C. ACM 5 (1962) 394-397.
2. M. Davis, H. Putnam, A computing procedure for quantification theory, J. ACM 7 (1960) 201-215.
3. http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Challenges/index.html
4. O. Dubois, On the r,s-SAT satisfiability problem and a conjecture of tovey, Discrete Appl. Math. 26 (1990) 51-60.
5. O. Dubois, P. Andre, Y. Boufkhad, J. Carlier, SAT versus UNSAT, American Mathematical Society DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 26, pp. 415-436.
6. J.N. Hooker, V. Vinay, Branching rules for satisfiability, J. Automat. Reason. 15 (1995) 359-383.
7. R.G. Jeroslow, J. Wang, Solving propositional satisfiability problems, Ann. Math. Artificial Intell. 1 (1990) 167-187.
8. D.S. Johnson, Approximation algorithms for combinatorial problems, J. Comput. System Sci. 9 (1974) 256-278.
9. D.W. Loveland, Automated Theorem Proving: A Logical Basis, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.
10. A. van Gelder, Y.K. Tsuji, Satisfiability testing with more reasoning and less guessing, American Mathematical Society DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 26, pp. 559-586.