Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Resolution and Binary Decision Diagrams Cannot Simulate Each Other Polynomially

Extended Abstract

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Perspectives of System Informatics (PSI 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2244))

Abstract

Proving formulas in propositional logic can be done in different ways. Some of these are based on of resolution, others on binary decision diagrams (BDDs). Experimental evidence suggests that BDDs and resolution based techniques are fundamentally different. This paper is an extended abstract of a paper [3] in which we confirm these findings by mathematical proof.We provide examples that are easy for BDDs and exponentially hard for any form of resolution, and vice versa, examples that are easy for resolution and exponentially hard for BDDs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ben-Sasson, E., and Wigderson, A. Short proofs are narrow-resolution made simple. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (1999), pp. 517–526.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bryant, R. E. Graph-based algorithms for boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers C-35, 8 (1986), 677–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Groote, J. F., and Zantema, H. Resolution and binary decision diagrams cannot simulate each other polynomially. Journal of Discrete Applied Mathematics (2001). To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Haken, A. The intractability of resolution. Theoretical Computer Science 39 (1985), 297–308.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Meinel, C., and Theobald, T. Algorithms and Data Structures in VLSI Design: OBDD— Foundations and Applications. Springer, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Tseitin, G. On the complexity of derivation in propositional calculus. In Studies in Constructive Mathematics and Mathematical Logic, part 2 (1968), pp. 115–125. Reprinted in J. Siekmann and G. Wrightson (editors),Automation of reasoning vol. 2, pp. 466–483.,Springer-Verlag Berlin, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Uribe, T. E., and Stickel, M. E. Ordered binary decision diagrams and the Davis-Putnam procedure. In First conference on Constraints in Computational Logic(1994), J.-P. Jouannaud, Ed., vol. 845of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, pp. 34–49.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Urquhart, A. Hard examples for resolution. Journal of the ACM 34, 1 (1987), 209–219.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Urquhart, A. The complexity of propositional proofs. The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 1, 4 (1995), 425–467.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Zantema, H., and van de Pol, J. C. A rewriting approach to binary decision diagrams. Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming (2001). To appear.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, 5600, Eindhoven, MB, The Netherlands

    Jan Friso Groote & Hans Zantema

Authors
  1. Jan Friso Groote
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hans Zantema
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Informatics and Mathematical Modelling, Technical University of Denmark, Bldg.322, 106-108, Richard Petersens Plads, 2800, Lyngby, Denmark

    Dines Bjørner

  2. Computer Science Department, Technical University of Munich, Arcisstr.21, 80290, Munich, Germany

    Manfred Broy

  3. A.P.Ershov Institute of Informatics Systems, Acad.Lavrentjev ave.,6, 630090, Novosibirsk, Russia

    Alexandre V. Zamulin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Groote, J.F., Zantema, H. (2001). Resolution and Binary Decision Diagrams Cannot Simulate Each Other Polynomially. In: Bjørner, D., Broy, M., Zamulin, A.V. (eds) Perspectives of System Informatics. PSI 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2244. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45575-2_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45575-2_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43075-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45575-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation