skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Exact Model Counting of Query Expressions: Limitations of Propositional Methods

Published:03 February 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We prove exponential lower bounds on the running time of the state-of-the-art exact model counting algorithms—algorithms for exactly computing the number of satisfying assignments, or the satisfying probability, of Boolean formulas. These algorithms can be seen, either directly or indirectly, as building Decision-Decomposable Negation Normal Form (decision-DNNF) representations of the input Boolean formulas. Decision-DNNFs are a special case of d-DNNFs where d stands for deterministic. We show that any knowledge compilation representations from a class (called DLDDs in this article) that contain decision-DNNFs can be converted into equivalent Free Binary Decision Diagrams (FBDDs), also known as Read-Once Branching Programs, with only a quasi-polynomial increase in representation size. Leveraging known exponential lower bounds for FBDDs, we then obtain similar exponential lower bounds for decision-DNNFs, which imply exponential lower bounds for model-counting algorithms. We also separate the power of decision-DNNFs from d-DNNFs and a generalization of decision-DNNFs known as AND-FBDDs.

We then prove new lower bounds for FBDDs that yield exponential lower bounds on the running time of these exact model counters when applied to the problem of query evaluation in tuple-independent probabilistic databases—computing the probability of an answer to a query given independent probabilities of the individual tuples in a database instance. This approach to the query evaluation problem, in which one first obtains the lineage for the query and database instance as a Boolean formula and then performs weighted model counting on the lineage, is known as grounded inference. A second approach, known as lifted inference or extensional query evaluation, exploits the high-level structure of the query as a first-order formula. Although it has been widely believed that lifted inference is strictly more powerful than grounded inference on the lineage alone, no formal separation has previously been shown for query evaluation. In this article, we show such a formal separation for the first time. In particular, we exhibit a family of database queries for which polynomial-time extensional query evaluation techniques were previously known but for which query evaluation via grounded inference using the state-of-the-art exact model counters requires exponential time.

References

  1. 2014. The SDD Package: Version 1.1.1. Retrieved January 31, 2014, from http://reasoning.cs.ucla.edu/sdd/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Sheldon B. Akers. 1978. Binary decision diagrams. IEEE Trans. Comput. 27, 6 (1978), 509--516. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Fahiem Bacchus, Shannon Dalmao, and Toniann Pitassi. 2003. Algorithms and complexity results for #SAT and Bayesian inference. In FOCS. 340--351. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Roberto J. Bayardo, Jr., and J. D. Pehoushek. 2000. Counting models using connected components. In AAAI. 157--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Paul Beame, Russell Impagliazzo, Toniann Pitassi, and Nathan Segerlind. 2010. Formula caching in DPLL. ACM Trans. Comput. Theory 1, 3 (2010). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Paul Beame, Henry A. Kautz, and Ashish Sabharwal. 2004. Towards understanding and harnessing the potential of clause learning. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 22 (2004), 319--351. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Paul Beame, Jerry Li, Sudeepa Roy, and Dan Suciu. 2013. Lower bounds for exact model counting and applications in probabilistic databases. In UAI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Paul Beame, Jerry Li, Sudeepa Roy, and Dan Suciu. 2014. Counting of query expressions: Limitations of propositional methods. In ICDT. 177--188.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Paul Beame and Vincent Liew. 2015. New limits for knowledge compilation and applications to exact model counting. In UAI. 131--140. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Paul Beame, Guy Van den Broeck, Eric Gribkoff, and Dan Suciu. 2015. Symmetric weighted first-order model counting. In PODS. 313--328. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Eli Ben-Sasson and Avi Wigderson. 2001. Short proofs are narrow—Resolution made simple. J. ACM 48, 2 (Mar. 2001), 149--169. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Beate Bollig and Ingo Wegener. 1998. A very simple function that requires exponential size read-once branching programs. Inf. Process. Lett. 66, 2 (April 1998), 53--57. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Randal E. Bryant. 1986. Graph-based algorithms for boolean function manipulation. IEEE Trans. Comput. 35, 8 (1986), 677--691. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Nilesh N. Dalvi and Dan Suciu. 2012. The dichotomy of probabilistic inference for unions of conjunctive queries. J. ACM 59, 6 (2012), 30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Adnan Darwiche. 2001a. Decomposable negation normal form. J. ACM 48, 4 (2001), 608--647. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Adnan Darwiche. 2001b. On the tractable counting of theory models and its application to truth maintenance and belief revision. J. Appl. Non-Class. Logic. 11, 1--2 (2001), 11--34.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Adnan Darwiche. 2011. SDD: A new canonical representation of propositional knowledge bases. In IJCAI 2011, Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 819--826. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Adnan Darwiche and Pierre Marquis. 2002. A knowledge compilation map. J. Artif. Int. Res. 17, 1 (Sept. 2002), 229--264. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Martin Davis, George Logemann, and Donald Loveland. 1962. A machine program for theorem-proving. Commun. ACM 5, 7 (1962), 394--397. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Martin Davis and Hilary Putnam. 1960. A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. ACM 7, 3 (1960), 201--215. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Pedro Domingos and Daniel Lowd. 2009. Markov Logic: An Interface Layer for Artificial Intelligence. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Carla P. Gomes, Ashish Sabharwal, and Bart Selman. 2009. Model counting. In Handbook of Satisfiability. IOS Press, 633--654.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Eric Gribkoff and Dan Suciu. 2016. SlimShot: In-database probabilistic inference for knowledge bases. Proc. VLDB 9, 7 (2016), 552--563. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Jinbo Huang and Adnan Darwiche. 2005. DPLL with a trace: From SAT to knowledge compilation. In IJCAI. 156--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Jinbo Huang and Adnan Darwiche. 2007. The language of search. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 29 (2007), 191--219. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Manfred Jaeger and Guy Van den Broeck. 2012. Liftability of probabilistic inference: Upper and lower bounds. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Statistical Relational AI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Abhay Kumar Jha and Dan Suciu. 2011. Knowledge compilation meets database theory: Compiling queries to decision diagrams. In ICDT. 162--173. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Abhay Kumar Jha and Dan Suciu. 2013. Knowledge compilation meets database theory: Compiling queries to decision diagrams. Theory Comput. Syst. 52, 3 (2013), 403--440. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Stephen M. Majercik and Michael L. Littman. 1998. Using caching to solve larger probabilistic planning problems. In AAAI. 954--959. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. William Joseph Masek. 1976. A Fast Algorithm for the String Editing Problem and Decision Graph Complexity. Master’s thesis, MIT.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Christian Muise, Sheila A. McIlraith, J. Christopher Beck, and Eric I. Hsu. 2012. Dsharp: Fast d-DNNF compilation with sharpSAT. In Canadian AI. 356--361. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Igor Razgon. 2016. On the read-once property of branching programs and CNFs of bounded treewidth. Algorithmica 75, 2 (2016), 277--294. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Ashish Sabharwal. 2009. SymChaff: Exploiting symmetry in a structure-aware satisfiability solver. Constraints 14, 4 (2009), 478--505. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Tian Sang, Fahiem Bacchus, Paul Beame, Henry A. Kautz, and Toniann Pitassi. 2004. Combining component caching and clause learning for effective model counting. In SAT.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Richard P. Stanley. 1997. Enumerative Combinatorics. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Dan Suciu, Dan Olteanu, Christopher Ré, and Christoph Koch. 2011. Probabilistic Databases. Morgan 8 Claypool. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Marc Thurley. 2006. sharpSAT: Counting models with advanced component caching and implicit BCP. In SAT. 424--429. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Leslie G. Valiant. 1979. The complexity of enumeration and reliability problems. SIAM J. Comput. 8, 3 (1979), 410--421.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Guy Van den Broeck. 2011. On the completeness of first-order knowledge compilation for lifted probabilistic inference. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 24: 25th Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2011. 1386--1394. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Guy Van den Broeck, Wannes Meert, and Adnan Darwiche. 2014. Skolemization for weighted first-order model counting. In KR. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Ingo Wegener. 2000. Branching Programs and Binary Decision Diagrams: Theory and Applications. SIAM, Philadelphia, PA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Exact Model Counting of Query Expressions: Limitations of Propositional Methods

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Database Systems
          ACM Transactions on Database Systems  Volume 42, Issue 1
          Invited Paper from ICDT 2014, Invited Paper from EDBT 2015, Regular Papers and Technical Correspondence
          March 2017
          263 pages
          ISSN:0362-5915
          EISSN:1557-4644
          DOI:10.1145/3015779
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2017 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 3 February 2017
          • Accepted: 1 August 2016
          • Revised: 1 May 2016
          • Received: 1 February 2015
          Published in tods Volume 42, Issue 1

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader