Resolution and Binary Decision Diagrams Cannot Simulate Each Other Polynomially

Authors:
Jan Friso Groote;Hans Zantema
Affiliations:
-;-
Venue:
PSI '02 Revised Papers from the 4th International Andrei Ershov Memorial Conference on Perspectives of System Informatics: Akademgorodok, Novosibirsk, Russia
Year:
2001

Citing 6
Cited 1

Graph-Based Algorithms for Boolean Function Manipulation

IEEE Transactions on Computers
Hard examples for resolution

Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Short proofs are narrow—resolution made simple

STOC '99 Proceedings of the thirty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Algorithms and Data Structures in VLSI Design

Algorithms and Data Structures in VLSI Design
Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams and the Davis-Putnam Procedure

CCL '94 Proceedings of the First International Conference on Constraints in Computational Logics
Resolution and binary decision diagrams cannot simulate each other polynomially

Discrete Applied Mathematics - The renesse issue on satisfiability

Resolution and binary decision diagrams cannot simulate each other polynomially

Discrete Applied Mathematics - The renesse issue on satisfiability

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

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.