Skip to main content

FindInstance boolean program is slow, but fast with BooleanConvert


FindInstance can be incredibly slow to solve a boolean program, but it can be significantly improved by using BooleanConvert to convert the constraints to "conjunctive normal form".


For example, here is a boolean program with some random constraints. My laptop can't solve it in 10 seconds.


vars = Array[x, 50];
SeedRandom[1234];
const = And @@ Table[Or[
     Xor[RandomChoice[vars], RandomChoice[vars]],
     Xor[RandomChoice[vars], RandomChoice[vars]]], 100];


TimeConstrained[FindInstance[const, vars, Booleans], 10, "Timeout!"]

(* Timeout! *)

Converting the constraints to "conjunctive normal form" helps FindInstance find a solution almost instantly:


AbsoluteTiming@FindInstance[ BooleanConvert[const,"CNF"], vars, Booleans ] // Short

(* {0.014715, {{x[1] -> False, x[2] -> False, <<46>>, x[49] -> False, x[50] -> False}}} *)

Wolfram's 4-color map-coloring example uses this trick; without BooleanConvert, it takes forever to run.



Does anyone know why this is so? I wish the FindInstance documentation would've mentioned this trick.


Related: 1, 2


Update: A colleague pointed out that "conjunctive normal form" has the appealing property that it allows short-circuiting, which allows the satisfiability solver to prune away large branches of the tree of candidate variable choices. For example,


BooleanConvert[Nand[x, y]~And~Xor[y, z], "CNF"]

converts the expression into the AND of a bunch of OR expressions:


(! x || ! y) && (! y || ! z) && (y || z)

When testing a candidate set of values for x,y,z, the solver can evaluate each OR expression in turn and stop as soon as it encounters one that evaluates to FALSE. For example, once it concludes that x=TRUE, y=TRUE makes the first OR clause FALSE, it can prune off the lower levels of the tree and doesn't need to try either value of z.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]
Post a Comment
Read more