Search Space and Average Proof Length of Resolution. H. Kleine Buning T. Lettmann. Universitat { GH { Paderborn. Postfach 16 21
|
|
- Oliver Morton
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Search Space and Average roof Length of Resolution H. Kleine Buning T. Lettmann FB 7 { Mathematik/Informatik Universitat { GH { aderborn ostfach 6 2 D{4790 aderborn (Germany) E{mail: kbcsl@uni-paderborn.de lettmann@uni-paderborn.de Abstract In this paper we introduce a denition of search trees for resolution based proof procedures. This denition describes more clearly the dierences between the restrictions of resolution. Applying this concept to monotone restrictions of the resolution it is shown that the average proof length for propositional formulas is at most four times as large as for unrestricted resolution. The search trees used within this paper also allow the representation of space bounded resolution. Introduction Many eorts have been made to classify proof procedures like resolution, restrictions of resolution and other systems like cutting plane systems, Davis{utnam algorithms etc. with respect to the minimal proof length, e.g. see [6]. Also restrictions of the resolution proof procedure can be classied in this way [2], [3], [4], [5], [9], [0]. But these papers deal with worst{case complexities. In practice many restrictions show to be very ecient e.g. N{resolution whereas they are disqualied by looking at the proof length in the worst case. This may point out that measuring the minimal proof length is not really helpful in comparing proof systems with respect to practical applications. In order to get a notion of the eciency of a restriction in the average case, we carefully have to investigate into the search space of these restrictions. Our approach is to give a denition of a search space that is structured as a tree that contains all possible derivations, each given by the sequence of resolution steps that are performed. We also want to integrate a principle of locality. Every node within the search tree contains all information to generate the subtree with this node as a root. Many restrictions of resolution also have the property to keep derivability during the further stages of a proof. That means if a clause can be resolved by one resolution step once in a derivation, this resolution step also is possible in a stage of the proof later on. Note that linear restrictions do not fulll this monotony condition. But for monotone restrictions, e.g. for N-resolution it is proven that the average proof length is at most four times as large as for unrestricted resolution. Furthermore, we study how this concept of search trees can be combined with space bounded
2 resolution restrictions. Here, the memory for storing clauses during a derivation is bound by functions in the length of the starting formula. 2 reliminaries We assume that the reader is familiar with the basic notations of propositional logic and resolution. A resolution step can be seen as a operation on a set of clauses with the following actions:. Select resolvable clauses ' ; ' 2 from. 2. Resolve ' ; ' 2 : ' ; ' 2 j RES '. 3. Add ' to (if ' is a new clause). 4. Remove some clauses from. It is well{known that the empty clause can be generated by a sequence of applications of the operation if and only if the formula is unsatisable. The resolution remains complete for several restrictions e.g. N{resolution (one of the parent clauses must be negative clause) and linear resolution (one of the parent clauses is the previous resolvent), that have been developed in order to reduce the degree of nondeterminism, i.e. the number of choices for the parent clauses. This means that the restrictions reduce the size of the search space. With additional strategies, take for example the level{saturation strategy or the unit{preference strategy deterministic proof systems can be obtained. (For an overview on restrictions of resolution and additional strategies see e.g. [], [8], [].) In our terminology a resolution based procedure X{Res is a resolution operation with some local property and with or without some strategy to determine in which order the local resolution operation has to be applied to the clauses. Therefore, we say that X{Res is a restriction of the resolution. Thus, a resolution based procedure X{Res can be described as. Select resolvable clauses ' ; ' 2 according to the restriction X{Res. 2. Resolve ' ; ' 2 : ' ; ' 2 j RES '. 3. Add ' to (if ' is a new clause). 4. Remove some clauses from according to the restriction X{Res. For a resolution based proof procedure X{Res we dene a derivation via X{Res in the following way. Denition 2. (derivation via X{Res) For a propositional formula in CNF and a clause ' we say ' is derivable from via X{Res, j X?Res ' if and only if ' is a clause of or there is a nite sequence ' : : : : ; ' n of clauses with ' n = ' and i ; i 2 j ' RES i where i and i 2 are clauses in [ f' ; : : : ; ' i? g fullling the special conditions of X{Res. ' : : : : ; ' n are called the intermediate clauses of the derivation. For a formula and a resolution based procedure X? Res the closure is dened as X? Res () = f' j j X?Res 'g.
3 3 Search Tree There are dierent approaches to dene the search space of a resolution based proof procedure. E.g. all possible ways of applying an inference rule to the initially given set of clauses and to clauses derived from them can determine the search space for a formula. Often, the search space is seen as the set of all initially given or derivable clauses and the proof procedure investigates these clauses using a systematic search strategy. Our approach also represents all possible derivations. But we try to give a representation that is independent from minor constraints as the order of clauses and that also represents concepts as e.g. proof length and resolution restrictions. As mentioned above, we will dene the search space as a search tree. We don't use the concept of search trees in their classical meaning; our search tree represents a decision tree. Each node represents a sequence of resolution steps, and dierent paths in the tree represent dierent choices for the parent clauses. In order to make clear the idea of our denition, we will discuss the N{resolution as an example of a restriction of the resolution. In case of the N{resolution (one of the parent clauses must be a negative clause) we can divide the set of clauses of the initial formula into N, the set of negative clauses and the clauses with at least one positive literal n N. Thus, the set of all possible choices for the parent clauses of the rst resolution step using N{resolution can be represented by N ( n N ). Therefore, we use this product as the label of the root of the search tree for. Now there may be several choices for clauses we can resolve using N-resolution. For each pair of clauses (' ; ' 2 ) 2 N ( n N ) for which ' ; ' 2 j ' and ' is a new clause (i.e. ' 62 ), we X?Res introduce a separate successor node. The label of such a son is determined by ( N [f'g)(n N ) if ' is a negative clause and by N ( n N [ f'g) otherwise. Then, we continue with each node and perform the above steps analogously. More generally the label of a successor node can be computed by a successor function, which essentially depends on the restriction, the label of the father and the resolvent. If the empty clause is contained in the label, then no further successor of this node will exist. On the one hand the number of successor nodes of a node shows the level of nondeterminism we have for a resolution step. Each implementation of a resolution restriction follows one path from the root of the search tree to a leaf. But within the search tree all computations depending on dierent clause orders are represented simultaneously. On the other hand we force that only successor nodes exist if a new clause was deduced. In practice also some eort is necessary to determine whether a deduced clause really is new. If we also represent such unsuccessful tries as nodes, we will get innite search trees. Denition 3. (search tree for resolution) For a resolution based proof procedure X? Res the search tree is a labeled tree T X?Res () specied by (; I; S X?Res ; j X?Res ) where is a formula, I is the label of the root node and S X?Res computes the label of successor nodes determined by the specied resolution restriction j X?Res in the following way: Let be 2 the label of some node in the search tree.. If the empty clause is contained in [ 2, then the node is a leaf node.
4 2. For each pair ' 2, ' to which one resolution step according to the X{resolution can be applied, ' ; ' 2 j ' and ' 62 X?Res [ 2 (' is a new clause), there is a successor node labeled by S( 2 ; '). For sake of simplicity we assume S( 2 ; t) = f(t; t)g. A node with this label cannot have a successor node. Therefore, we say that leaves in the search tree are labeled by the empty clause t. Each branch within the search tree contains at least one derivation tree. But for dierent branches these trees might not be dierent because the sequence of resolution steps is coded within a branch of the search tree. Therefore, we can look upon a path from the root to a leaf t in a search tree as a refutation. For any sequence of resolution steps we can easily determine the corresponding branch within the search tree. For the opposite direction we have no information concerning the parent clauses of a resolution step. E.g. there are two ways to derive A from f(a _ B); (A _ C); (A _ :B); (A _ :C)g. In order to distinguish the two possible resolution steps within the search tree we could introduce edge labels that specify the parent clauses of the corresponding resolution step. Let us consider search trees for some resolution strategies. Examples:. Search tree for unrestricted resolution: T Res () is given by (; ; S Res ; j Res ) If we have a node with label 2 not containing the empty clause, then for each pair (' ; ' 2 ) 2 2 with ' ; ' 2 j ' and ' is a new clause for Res 2 we have successor node. The label of a successor node is S Res ( 2 ; ') = ( [f'g)( 2 [f'g). Obviously, there is no need using Cartesian products as label, as both sets are equal for the label of each node. 2. Search tree for N{resolution: T N?Res () is given by (; I N?Res ; S N?Res ; j N?Res ) The label of the root node is I N?Res = N ( n N ) with N denoting the set of negative clauses in (clauses consisting of negative literals only). Using ( ( [ f'g) S N?Res ( 2 ; ') = 2 if ' is a negative clause, ( 2 [ f'g) otherwise we obtain labels with the rst set containing negative clauses only. Therefore, each resolution step is a N{resolution step. Analogously, the search tree for the {resolution (one of the parent clauses is a positive clause) T?Res can be described. 3. Search tree for unit{resolution: T U?Res () is given by (; I U?Res ; S U?Res ; j U?Res ) Dene I U?Res = U() with U() the set of units in and ( ( [ f'g) ( S U?Res ( 2 ; ') = 2 [ f'g) if ' is a unit clause, ( 2 [ f'g) otherwise For resolution, N{resolution and unit{resolution the search tree T X?Res () has a remarkable property: If we leave all leaf nodes and all adjacent edges aside, we get a subtree of T X?Res (). Within this subtree all paths from the root to a leaf have the same length, i.e. the subtree is balanced. We call search trees with this property prebalanced trees.
5 A bit more complicated is the representation of the search tree for linear resolution. Example: 4. Search tree for linear resolution: T lin?res () is given by (; I lin?res ; S lin?res ; j lin?res ) Dene I lin?res = as in the case of unrestricted resolution. The rst part of the label of each other node contains the clause resolved last, the second part contains the initial clauses and all ancestor clauses for this resolution path: S lin?res ( 2 ; ') = f'g ( 2 [ f'g) 2 Again we look at the subtree of T X?Res () we obtain by leaving all leaf nodes and all adjacent edges aside. But this time the subtree in general has paths of dierent length. This is based on two reasons: Firstly, the length of derivation depends on the choice of the clauses for the rst resolution. Secondly, in each further resolution step one of the clauses is already given, therefore the choice is limited. 4 Average roof Length A lot of work has been done in comparing proof systems with respect to the minimal proof length. But in practice some restrictions of the resolution, for which formulas with superpolynomially minimal proof exist whereas the resolution has polynomial minimal proof length, are much more ecient than unrestricted resolution. Hence, in the following we will compare the average proof length for a class of restrictions of the resolution. In order to motivate the denition of this class of restrictions let us consider the N{ resolution again. If we have a derivation j N?Res t, then we can extend the sequence of derived clauses by doing arbitrarily many resolution steps that are not necessary for the derivation of the empty clause. Therefore, we can deduce the closure N? Res ()? ftg and nally generate the empty clause. That means for any node in the search tree T N?Res () the path from the root to this node can be extended in such a way that along that path all clauses of N? Res () n are generated. Denition 4. (monotone restrictions for resolution) Let be X{resolution some resolution based proof procedure. We say the X-resolution is monotone if and only if for each the following holds: Let be j X?Res ' and ' ; : : : ; ' n with ' n = ' the sequence of intermediate clauses for a derivation of '. If there is a clause ' 0 n 6= ' n such that ' ; : : : ; ' n? ; ' 0 n are the intermediate clauses of another derivation via X? Res, then also ' ; : : :; ' n? ; ' 0 n ; ' n describe a possible derivation via X? Res. Note that the linear resolution is not monotone in this sense. For example, take the formula = :A^A^(:A_C). Resolving the rst two clauses results in the empty clause. But resolving the last two clauses results in the clause C and no further linear resolution step is possible. Examples of monotone restrictions are unrestricted resolution, unit{resolution, input{resolution and other strategies based on sets of support like N{resolution and {resolution. (Note that input{resolution results in linear proofs, but the restriction that one parent clause has to be from the initial clause set keeps monotony.) The average proof length of (X{)resolution applied to a formula is the sum over the length of all refutations divided by the number of dierent refutations. In terms of the associated search tree,
6 T (X?)Res () the average proof length is the average external path length of the tree. If the formula is unsatisable, then each leaf is the empty clause. Otherwise, in case of a monotone resolution restriction X? Res a leaf is reached after generating the closure X? Res (). We recall for trees the denition of average (external) path length. Denition 4.2 (average (external) path length) Let be T a tree with root r and L(T ) the set of leafs of the tree. The average external path length A(T ) is dened as A(T ) = l2l(t ) jp(r; l)j #(L(T )) where p(r; l) is the path from the root r to the leaf l, jp(r; l)j is the number of edges on this path and #(L(T )) is the number of leafs of T. The average path length A (T ) is dened as where N(T ) is the set of nodes of T. A (T ) = i2n (T ) jp(r; i)j #(N(T )) For monotone restrictions of the resolution we show that the average proof length is at most four times as long as the average proof length for unrestricted resolution. (This is not proven as a sharp bound.) Theorem 4.3. For any satisable formula and any restriction of the resolution holds A(T X?Res ()) A(T Res ()) 2. If the X{resolution is monotone and is not satisable, then it holds A(T X?Res ()) #(X-Res ())? #() #(Res ())? #() (4 A(T Res())? ) The fraction #(X{Res ())? #() #(Res is less or equal than because for each restriction of the resolution ())? #() the size of the closure X? Res () is less or equal than the size of Res (). Therefore, we obtain A(T X?Res ()) 4 A(T Res ()). Often the closure X? Res () is much smaller than Res (). If we could prove that on average the fraction #(X?Res ())? #() #(Res is less than for some k > 4, we ())? #() k even would obtain that on average holds A(T X?Res ()) < A(T Res ()) That would mean X{resolution is better than resolution. But so far no result in this area is known. Within the proof of the theorem 4.3 we will make use of some general properties of trees. For that reason we rstly prove some properties with respect to average (external) path length of trees. Note that a tree is balanced if and only if each leaf of T has the same depth.
7 Lemma 4.4 For each balanced tree T holds A(T ) 2 A (T ) roof: We prove the lemma by induction on the depth t of the tree and on the number n of sons of the root r. Note that for any balanced tree T with depth t the average external path length A(T ) equals t. For a tree T with depth and arbitrary number n of sons of the root we obtain A (T ) = therefore A(T ) 2 A (T ). n and n+ Now let be given a balanced tree with depth t. If the root has exactly one son, we omit the root node and the edge to the single successor node and obtain a balanced tree T 0 with depth t?. By induction hypothesis we know t? 2 A (T 0 ) = 2 i2n (T ) jp(r; i)j? #(N(T )) + #(N(T ))? Each path from the root to a node in T 0 corresponds to a path in T that is exactly one edge longer. In T we additionally have the path from the root of T to the root of T 0. For the number of nodes in T and T 0 holds #(N(T ))? = #(N(T 0 )). So we have 2 X i2n (T ) Since t > and #(N(T )) t we get jp(r; i)j? #(N(T )) + A #(N(T ))t? t? #(N(T )) + : 2 X i2n (T ) jp(r; i)j #(N(T ))t and division by #(N(T )) leads to the result 2 A (T ) t = A(T ). Now we suppose that the root of T has n > sons while the depth of T is t. We consider T as a join of n trees T ; : : :; T n of height t (T i is given by the root node r, exactly one of the successor nodes s i of r and the subtree under s i.) and hence we have 2 A (T ) = 2 n j= n j= i2n (T j ) jp(r; i)j #(N(T j ))? (n? ) Note that the root node r was considered in each of T ; : : : ; T n. Applying the induction hypothesis to T ; : : : ; T n (2 jp(r; i)j #(N(T j ))t for j n) implies i2n (T j ) 2 nx and therefore 2 A (T ) t. X j= i2n (T j ) jp(r; i)j t nx j= #(N(T j ))? t(n? ) Since the above result is only proven for balanced trees it can only be applied to resolution strategies with certain properties of the search tree. :
8 Denition 4.5 (prebalanced tree, monotone tree, leaf degree) A tree T is called prebalanced if and only if removing each leaf of T leads to a balanced tree. A tree T is called monotone if and only if for any inner node n 0 and any successor node n of n 0 holds that n has at least k leafs as direct successors if n 0 has k leafs as direct successors. A tree T has leaf degree k if and only if each inner node has at most k leafs as direct successors and there is an inner node with k leafs as direct successors. Let be T a tree with leaf degree r and k r. Then T k is the tree we obtain by adding to each inner node of T with p leafs as direct successors k? p new leafs. That means any inner node of T k has exactly k leafs as direct successors. Lemma 4.6 For each monotone and prebalanced tree T with leaf degree less or equal than k holds A(T k ) 2 A(T ): roof: The external average path length of T k is at most the depth t of T. Since T is prebalanced and monotone, the average path length of T is at least t. This can be seen by a simple counting 2 argument. There exists an injective mapping associating to each leaf of T with depth r < t a leaf 2 with depth t? r. roof: (of theorem 4.3) Ad : If is satisable, then each path in the search tree T Res () has the same length. Since the search tree T X?Res () is a subtree of T Res (), we obtain the desired inequality. Ad 2: Let be given an unsatisable formula and a monotone restriction of the resolution X?Res. Note that Res itself is monotone. For this monotone restriction X? Res and the resolution Res we dene some variants of the associated search trees T (X?)Res ().. T (X?)Res () is the tree we get by removing each leaf from the tree T (X?)Res() 2. T t () is obtained by removing each leaf with label t and depth less than t, where t is (X?)Res the depth of the tree T (X?)Res (). 3. Let be k the number of complementary literals in the closure (X?)Res (). Then T k X?Res () is the tree we obtain by adding to each inner node of T (X?)Res () edges leading to new leaves with label t, such that each inner node has k leaves with label t. Next we will show three propositions.. A(T X?Res ()) A(TX?Res()) t = #(X? Res ())? #() A(T t #(Res ())? #() Res()) Since X? Res is monotone, the average external path length for T t X?Res () is #(X? Res ())? #(). Analogously we see A(T t ()) = Res #(Res ())? #(). No leaf t of T X?Res () with a path from the root shorter than #(X? Res ())? #() occurs in the tree T t (). X?Res Therefore, we obtain A(T X?Res ()) A(T t X?Res ()).
9 2. A(T k Res ()) 2 A(T Res()) The inequality follows from lemma 4.6, because T Res () is monotone and prebalanced. 3. A(T t ()) + Res 2 A(T k ()) Res 2 A(TRes k ()) = 2 ( l2l(t k Res ())jp(r;l)j? ) + 2 #(L(T Res k ())) = 2 ( k i2n (T Res ())(jp(r;i)j+) k #(N (T? ) + 2 Res ())) = 2 i2n (T Res ())jp(r;i)j #(N (T Res ())) + 2 (T Res () is a balanced tree, lemma 4.4) l2l(t Res ())jp(r;l)j #(L(T Res ())) + 2 = ( #(Res ())? #()? ) + 2 = #(Res ())? #() + = l2l(t t Res ())jp(r;l)j #(L(T t Res ())) + = A(T t Res ()) + From these inequalities we obtain A(T X?Res ()) #(X?Res ())? #() #(Res A(T t ()) ())? #() Res #(X?Res ())? #() #(Res (2 A(T k ())? #() Res ())? ) (because of proposition 2) #(X?Res ())? #() #(Res ())? #() (4 A(T Res ())? ) 5 Space Requirements The results of this section were originally presented in [7]. But in the context of search trees we get a clear notion of the basic idea that had to be expressed by complicated denitions in [7]. In the previous sections we have considered resolution operations adding the resolvent to the formula. This results in an stepwise increase of the size of the formula. But in practice often some clauses will be removed during the deduction in order to reduce the search space. A well{known
10 example is the subsumption rule which says that a clause can be omitted if we have a clause with (as a new resolvent). The degree of each node in the search tree T (X?)Res () is strongly connected to the number of clauses in the label(formulas) because the number of pairs of clauses which can be resolved is the number of sons of the node. Besides the various resolution restrictions we can demand that the length of these formulas is bound. A reasonable measure for this space requirement is the number of clauses we have to store actually during a deduction. Denition 5. (space bounded resolution) Let be given a function f : CNF! IN. For a formula in CNF and a clause ' 62 we dene the space bounded resolution with bound f (SB(f){resolution, ) (using the notation of denition 2.) by: j Res ' if and only if there is a Res derivation with intermediate clauses ' ; : : :; ' n and there f are formulas 0 = ; ; : : : ; n such that ' i ; ' i2 2 i?, i i? [ f' i g and j i j f(jj) holds. j Res f The above denition says, that after resolving two clauses, we keep the new resolvent and can remove one or more clauses. If we reach the space bound f(jj), we have to remove at least one of the old clauses. So we have a restricted number of clauses we can actually store during a deduction. The formulas i represent the stored clauses. In terms of the search tree a SB(f){resolution refutation is a path from the root to a node t where each node is labeled by 2 with j [ 2 j f(jj). For example, in the case of unit{resolution in each resolution step L; (:L _ ) j the parent clause (:L _ ) can be replaced by without changing satisability. Hence, each unit{resolution refutation can be shortened to get a SB(k){resolution refutation where k is the number of clauses of the initial formula. Another example is the input{resolution. For input{resolution the root of the search tree is labeled with. All of the remaining inner nodes of the search tree have a label f'g, where ' is the resolvent of a pair of clauses chosen from the sets of the label of the predecessor. That means the actual resolvent is stored and the previous resolvent is removed. Obviously, the size of the labels besides the root label is jj +. It is well{known that the unit{ and the input{resolution are not complete. For SB(f){resolution (together with strategies as e.g. N{resolution) incompleteness also may be the result of the lack of storage. This leads immediately to the question for which functions f the SB(f){resolution remains complete. Let be k the number of clauses of the initial formula. Then there exist unsatisable formulas for which no SB(k){resolution refutation exists. But for each unsatisable formula we can construct a resolution refutation with space bound f(x) = 2x, i.e. using at most 2 jj clauses [7]. It would be of interest to study dierent restrictions of resolution with respect to their space requirement.
11 6 Conclusion Our denition of search trees as a concept to compare the sizes of search spaces seems to be useful for at least monotone restrictions of resolution. Further research is needed to classify other restrictions, e.g. linear resolution. We also want to investigate whether our concept is appropriate to compare also essentially dierent proof procedures, e.g. resolution calculus and tableau methods. In order to strengthen the presented results it would also be interesting to investigate into the average size of closure X? Res () for dierent strategies. References [] C.-L. Chang, R. C.-T. Lee: Symbolic Logic and mechanical theorem proving, Academic ress (973) [2] Z. Galil: On the Complexity of Regular Resolution and the Davis{utnam rocedure, Theoretical Computer Science 4 (977), pp. 23{46 [3] A. Goerdt: Unrestricted resolution versus N-resolution, Theoretical Computer Science 93 (992) 59 { 67 [4] A. Goerdt: Davis-utnam resolution versus unrestricted resolution, Annals of Math. and AI 6 (992) 69 { 84 [5] A. Goerdt: Regular resolution versus unrestricted resolution, roc. GWAI (990), Fachberichte Informatik; also to appear in SIAM Journ. of Comp. [6] A. Haken: The Intractability of Resolution, Theoretical Computer Science 39 (985), pp [7] H. Kleine Buning: Minimal Space Requirement for Resolution, submitted for publication [8] D. W. Loveland: Automated Theorem roving: A Logical Basis, North Holland (978) [9] G. S. Tseitin: On the Complexity of Derivations in ropositional Calculus, in A. O. Silenko (Ed.): Studies in Constructive Mathematics and Mathematical Logic, art II (970), pp. 5{ 25 [0] A. Urquhart: Hard Examples for Resolution, Journal of the ACM 34 (987), pp. 209{29 [] L. Wos, R. Overbeek, E. Lusk, J. Boyle: Automated Reasoning: Introduction and Applications, rentice Hall (984)
SAT and DPLL. Introduction. Preliminaries. Normal forms DPLL. Complexity. Espen H. Lian. DPLL Implementation. Bibliography.
SAT and Espen H. Lian Ifi, UiO Implementation May 4, 2010 Espen H. Lian (Ifi, UiO) SAT and May 4, 2010 1 / 59 Espen H. Lian (Ifi, UiO) SAT and May 4, 2010 2 / 59 Introduction Introduction SAT is the problem
More informationNotes on Natural Logic
Notes on Natural Logic Notes for PHIL370 Eric Pacuit November 16, 2012 1 Preliminaries: Trees A tree is a structure T = (T, E), where T is a nonempty set whose elements are called nodes and E is a relation
More informationSAT and DPLL. Espen H. Lian. May 4, Ifi, UiO. Espen H. Lian (Ifi, UiO) SAT and DPLL May 4, / 59
SAT and DPLL Espen H. Lian Ifi, UiO May 4, 2010 Espen H. Lian (Ifi, UiO) SAT and DPLL May 4, 2010 1 / 59 Normal forms Normal forms DPLL Complexity DPLL Implementation Bibliography Espen H. Lian (Ifi, UiO)
More informationYao s Minimax Principle
Complexity of algorithms The complexity of an algorithm is usually measured with respect to the size of the input, where size may for example refer to the length of a binary word describing the input,
More informationFinding Equilibria in Games of No Chance
Finding Equilibria in Games of No Chance Kristoffer Arnsfelt Hansen, Peter Bro Miltersen, and Troels Bjerre Sørensen Department of Computer Science, University of Aarhus, Denmark {arnsfelt,bromille,trold}@daimi.au.dk
More informationTABLEAU-BASED DECISION PROCEDURES FOR HYBRID LOGIC
TABLEAU-BASED DECISION PROCEDURES FOR HYBRID LOGIC THOMAS BOLANDER AND TORBEN BRAÜNER Abstract. Hybrid logics are a principled generalization of both modal logics and description logics. It is well-known
More informationOn the Optimality of a Family of Binary Trees Techical Report TR
On the Optimality of a Family of Binary Trees Techical Report TR-011101-1 Dana Vrajitoru and William Knight Indiana University South Bend Department of Computer and Information Sciences Abstract In this
More informationBinary Decision Diagrams
Binary Decision Diagrams Hao Zheng Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of South Florida Tampa, FL 33620 Email: zheng@cse.usf.edu Phone: (813)974-4757 Fax: (813)974-5456 Hao Zheng
More informationLecture 2: The Simple Story of 2-SAT
0510-7410: Topics in Algorithms - Random Satisfiability March 04, 2014 Lecture 2: The Simple Story of 2-SAT Lecturer: Benny Applebaum Scribe(s): Mor Baruch 1 Lecture Outline In this talk we will show that
More informationStructural Induction
Structural Induction Jason Filippou CMSC250 @ UMCP 07-05-2016 Jason Filippou (CMSC250 @ UMCP) Structural Induction 07-05-2016 1 / 26 Outline 1 Recursively defined structures 2 Proofs Binary Trees Jason
More informationA relation on 132-avoiding permutation patterns
Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science DMTCS vol. VOL, 205, 285 302 A relation on 32-avoiding permutation patterns Natalie Aisbett School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sydney,
More informationGenerating all nite modular lattices of a given size
Generating all nite modular lattices of a given size Peter Jipsen and Nathan Lawless Dedicated to Brian Davey on the occasion of his 65th birthday Abstract. Modular lattices, introduced by R. Dedekind,
More informationBinary Decision Diagrams
Binary Decision Diagrams Hao Zheng Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of South Florida Tampa, FL 33620 Email: zheng@cse.usf.edu Phone: (813)974-4757 Fax: (813)974-5456 Hao Zheng
More information0.1 Equivalence between Natural Deduction and Axiomatic Systems
0.1 Equivalence between Natural Deduction and Axiomatic Systems Theorem 0.1.1. Γ ND P iff Γ AS P ( ) it is enough to prove that all axioms are theorems in ND, as MP corresponds to ( e). ( ) by induction
More informationNotes on the symmetric group
Notes on the symmetric group 1 Computations in the symmetric group Recall that, given a set X, the set S X of all bijections from X to itself (or, more briefly, permutations of X) is group under function
More informationComputing Unsatisfiable k-sat Instances with Few Occurrences per Variable
Computing Unsatisfiable k-sat Instances with Few Occurrences per Variable Shlomo Hoory and Stefan Szeider Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, shlomoh,szeider@cs.toronto.edu Abstract.
More informationCSE 100: TREAPS AND RANDOMIZED SEARCH TREES
CSE 100: TREAPS AND RANDOMIZED SEARCH TREES Midterm Review Practice Midterm covered during Sunday discussion Today Run time analysis of building the Huffman tree AVL rotations and treaps Huffman s algorithm
More informationOptimal Satisficing Tree Searches
Optimal Satisficing Tree Searches Dan Geiger and Jeffrey A. Barnett Northrop Research and Technology Center One Research Park Palos Verdes, CA 90274 Abstract We provide an algorithm that finds optimal
More informationNOTES ON FIBONACCI TREES AND THEIR OPTIMALITY* YASUICHI HORIBE INTRODUCTION 1. FIBONACCI TREES
0#0# NOTES ON FIBONACCI TREES AND THEIR OPTIMALITY* YASUICHI HORIBE Shizuoka University, Hamamatsu, 432, Japan (Submitted February 1982) INTRODUCTION Continuing a previous paper [3], some new observations
More informationEssays on Some Combinatorial Optimization Problems with Interval Data
Essays on Some Combinatorial Optimization Problems with Interval Data a thesis submitted to the department of industrial engineering and the institute of engineering and sciences of bilkent university
More informationStrong normalisation and the typed lambda calculus
CHAPTER 9 Strong normalisation and the typed lambda calculus In the previous chapter we looked at some reduction rules for intuitionistic natural deduction proofs and we have seen that by applying these
More informationCSE 21 Winter 2016 Homework 6 Due: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 11:59pm. Instructions
CSE 1 Winter 016 Homework 6 Due: Wednesday, May 11, 016 at 11:59pm Instructions Homework should be done in groups of one to three people. You are free to change group members at any time throughout the
More information1 Solutions to Tute09
s to Tute0 Questions 4. - 4. are straight forward. Q. 4.4 Show that in a binary tree of N nodes, there are N + NULL pointers. Every node has outgoing pointers. Therefore there are N pointers. Each node,
More informationRemarks: 1. Often we shall be sloppy about specifying the ltration. In all of our examples there will be a Brownian motion around and it will be impli
6 Martingales in continuous time Just as in discrete time, the notion of a martingale will play a key r^ole in our continuous time models. Recall that in discrete time, a sequence ; 1 ;::: ; n for which
More informationHomework #4. CMSC351 - Spring 2013 PRINT Name : Due: Thu Apr 16 th at the start of class
Homework #4 CMSC351 - Spring 2013 PRINT Name : Due: Thu Apr 16 th at the start of class o Grades depend on neatness and clarity. o Write your answers with enough detail about your approach and concepts
More informationTR : Knowledge-Based Rational Decisions
City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Computer Science Technical Reports Graduate Center 2009 TR-2009011: Knowledge-Based Rational Decisions Sergei Artemov Follow this and additional works
More informationMarkowitz portfolio theory
Markowitz portfolio theory Farhad Amu, Marcus Millegård February 9, 2009 1 Introduction Optimizing a portfolio is a major area in nance. The objective is to maximize the yield and simultaneously minimize
More informationLecture l(x) 1. (1) x X
Lecture 14 Agenda for the lecture Kraft s inequality Shannon codes The relation H(X) L u (X) = L p (X) H(X) + 1 14.1 Kraft s inequality While the definition of prefix-free codes is intuitively clear, we
More informationSupporting Information
Supporting Information Novikoff et al. 0.073/pnas.0986309 SI Text The Recap Method. In The Recap Method in the paper, we described a schedule in terms of a depth-first traversal of a full binary tree,
More informationThe Probabilistic Method - Probabilistic Techniques. Lecture 7: Martingales
The Probabilistic Method - Probabilistic Techniques Lecture 7: Martingales Sotiris Nikoletseas Associate Professor Computer Engineering and Informatics Department 2015-2016 Sotiris Nikoletseas, Associate
More informationTR : Knowledge-Based Rational Decisions and Nash Paths
City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Computer Science Technical Reports Graduate Center 2009 TR-2009015: Knowledge-Based Rational Decisions and Nash Paths Sergei Artemov Follow this and
More informationRecall: Data Flow Analysis. Data Flow Analysis Recall: Data Flow Equations. Forward Data Flow, Again
Data Flow Analysis 15-745 3/24/09 Recall: Data Flow Analysis A framework for proving facts about program Reasons about lots of little facts Little or no interaction between facts Works best on properties
More informationIntroduction to Greedy Algorithms: Huffman Codes
Introduction to Greedy Algorithms: Huffman Codes Yufei Tao ITEE University of Queensland In computer science, one interesting method to design algorithms is to go greedy, namely, keep doing the thing that
More informationPractical SAT Solving
Practical SAT Solving Lecture 1 Carsten Sinz, Tomáš Balyo April 18, 2016 NSTITUTE FOR THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE KIT University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Laboratory of the Helmholtz
More informationOn the Optimality of a Family of Binary Trees
On the Optimality of a Family of Binary Trees Dana Vrajitoru Computer and Information Sciences Department Indiana University South Bend South Bend, IN 46645 Email: danav@cs.iusb.edu William Knight Computer
More informationComputing Unsatisfiable k-sat Instances with Few Occurrences per Variable
Computing Unsatisfiable k-sat Instances with Few Occurrences per Variable Shlomo Hoory and Stefan Szeider Abstract (k, s)-sat is the propositional satisfiability problem restricted to instances where each
More informationAn effective perfect-set theorem
An effective perfect-set theorem David Belanger, joint with Keng Meng (Selwyn) Ng CTFM 2016 at Waseda University, Tokyo Institute for Mathematical Sciences National University of Singapore The perfect
More informationR-automata. 1 Introduction. Parosh Aziz Abdulla, Pavel Krcal, and Wang Yi
R-automata Parosh Aziz Abdulla, Pavel Krcal, and Wang Yi Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University, Sweden Email: {parosh,pavelk,yi}@it.uu.se Abstract. We introduce R-automata a model for
More informationDESCENDANTS IN HEAP ORDERED TREES OR A TRIUMPH OF COMPUTER ALGEBRA
DESCENDANTS IN HEAP ORDERED TREES OR A TRIUMPH OF COMPUTER ALGEBRA Helmut Prodinger Institut für Algebra und Diskrete Mathematik Technical University of Vienna Wiedner Hauptstrasse 8 0 A-00 Vienna, Austria
More informationCS134: Networks Spring Random Variables and Independence. 1.2 Probability Distribution Function (PDF) Number of heads Probability 2 0.
CS134: Networks Spring 2017 Prof. Yaron Singer Section 0 1 Probability 1.1 Random Variables and Independence A real-valued random variable is a variable that can take each of a set of possible values in
More informationIEOR E4004: Introduction to OR: Deterministic Models
IEOR E4004: Introduction to OR: Deterministic Models 1 Dynamic Programming Following is a summary of the problems we discussed in class. (We do not include the discussion on the container problem or the
More informationSublinear Time Algorithms Oct 19, Lecture 1
0368.416701 Sublinear Time Algorithms Oct 19, 2009 Lecturer: Ronitt Rubinfeld Lecture 1 Scribe: Daniel Shahaf 1 Sublinear-time algorithms: motivation Twenty years ago, there was practically no investigation
More informationComputational Independence
Computational Independence Björn Fay mail@bfay.de December 20, 2014 Abstract We will introduce different notions of independence, especially computational independence (or more precise independence by
More information5 Deduction in First-Order Logic
5 Deduction in First-Order Logic The system FOL C. Let C be a set of constant symbols. FOL C is a system of deduction for the language L # C. Axioms: The following are axioms of FOL C. (1) All tautologies.
More informationVirtual Demand and Stable Mechanisms
Virtual Demand and Stable Mechanisms Jan Christoph Schlegel Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Lausanne, Switzerland jschlege@unil.ch Abstract We study conditions for the existence of stable
More informationThe Traveling Salesman Problem. Time Complexity under Nondeterminism. A Nondeterministic Algorithm for tsp (d)
The Traveling Salesman Problem We are given n cities 1, 2,..., n and integer distances d ij between any two cities i and j. Assume d ij = d ji for convenience. The traveling salesman problem (tsp) asks
More informationsample-bookchapter 2015/7/7 9:44 page 1 #1 THE BINOMIAL MODEL
sample-bookchapter 2015/7/7 9:44 page 1 #1 1 THE BINOMIAL MODEL In this chapter we will study, in some detail, the simplest possible nontrivial model of a financial market the binomial model. This is a
More informationAnother Variant of 3sat. 3sat. 3sat Is NP-Complete. The Proof (concluded)
3sat k-sat, where k Z +, is the special case of sat. The formula is in CNF and all clauses have exactly k literals (repetition of literals is allowed). For example, (x 1 x 2 x 3 ) (x 1 x 1 x 2 ) (x 1 x
More informationHeap Building Bounds
Heap Building Bounds Zhentao Li 1 and Bruce A. Reed 2 1 School of Computer Science, McGill University zhentao.li@mail.mcgill.ca 2 School of Computer Science, McGill University breed@cs.mcgill.ca Abstract.
More informationGame Theory: Normal Form Games
Game Theory: Normal Form Games Michael Levet June 23, 2016 1 Introduction Game Theory is a mathematical field that studies how rational agents make decisions in both competitive and cooperative situations.
More informationON THE MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM SIZES OF A GRAPH
Discussiones Mathematicae Graph Theory 37 (2017) 623 632 doi:10.7151/dmgt.1941 ON THE MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM SIZES OF A GRAPH WITH GIVEN k-connectivity Yuefang Sun Department of Mathematics Shaoxing University
More informationLECTURE 2: MULTIPERIOD MODELS AND TREES
LECTURE 2: MULTIPERIOD MODELS AND TREES 1. Introduction One-period models, which were the subject of Lecture 1, are of limited usefulness in the pricing and hedging of derivative securities. In real-world
More informationSET 1C Binary Trees. 2. (i) Define the height of a binary tree or subtree and also define a height balanced (AVL) tree. (2)
SET 1C Binary Trees 1. Construct a binary tree whose preorder traversal is K L N M P R Q S T and inorder traversal is N L K P R M S Q T 2. (i) Define the height of a binary tree or subtree and also define
More informationOn the Lower Arbitrage Bound of American Contingent Claims
On the Lower Arbitrage Bound of American Contingent Claims Beatrice Acciaio Gregor Svindland December 2011 Abstract We prove that in a discrete-time market model the lower arbitrage bound of an American
More informationis a path in the graph from node i to node i k provided that each of(i i), (i i) through (i k; i k )isan arc in the graph. This path has k ; arcs in i
ENG Engineering Applications of OR Fall 998 Handout The shortest path problem Consider the following problem. You are given a map of the city in which you live, and you wish to gure out the fastest route
More informationUNIT VI TREES. Marks - 14
UNIT VI TREES Marks - 14 SYLLABUS 6.1 Non-linear data structures 6.2 Binary trees : Complete Binary Tree, Basic Terms: level number, degree, in-degree and out-degree, leaf node, directed edge, path, depth,
More informationThe Limiting Distribution for the Number of Symbol Comparisons Used by QuickSort is Nondegenerate (Extended Abstract)
The Limiting Distribution for the Number of Symbol Comparisons Used by QuickSort is Nondegenerate (Extended Abstract) Patrick Bindjeme 1 James Allen Fill 1 1 Department of Applied Mathematics Statistics,
More informationSplay Trees. Splay Trees - 1
Splay Trees In balanced tree schemes, explicit rules are followed to ensure balance. In splay trees, there are no such rules. Search, insert, and delete operations are like in binary search trees, except
More informationThreshold logic proof systems
Threshold logic proof systems Samuel Buss Peter Clote May 19, 1995 In this note, we show the intersimulation of three threshold logics within a polynomial size and constant depth factor. The logics are
More informationLecture 5: Iterative Combinatorial Auctions
COMS 6998-3: Algorithmic Game Theory October 6, 2008 Lecture 5: Iterative Combinatorial Auctions Lecturer: Sébastien Lahaie Scribe: Sébastien Lahaie In this lecture we examine a procedure that generalizes
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.lo] 24 Feb 2014
Residuated Basic Logic II. Interpolation, Decidability and Embedding Minghui Ma 1 and Zhe Lin 2 arxiv:1404.7401v1 [math.lo] 24 Feb 2014 1 Institute for Logic and Intelligence, Southwest University, Beibei
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.co] 31 Mar 2009
A BIJECTION BETWEEN WELL-LABELLED POSITIVE PATHS AND MATCHINGS OLIVIER BERNARDI, BERTRAND DUPLANTIER, AND PHILIPPE NADEAU arxiv:0903.539v [math.co] 3 Mar 009 Abstract. A well-labelled positive path of
More informationGödel algebras free over finite distributive lattices
TANCL, Oxford, August 4-9, 2007 1 Gödel algebras free over finite distributive lattices Stefano Aguzzoli Brunella Gerla Vincenzo Marra D.S.I. D.I.COM. D.I.C.O. University of Milano University of Insubria
More information3 Arbitrage pricing theory in discrete time.
3 Arbitrage pricing theory in discrete time. Orientation. In the examples studied in Chapter 1, we worked with a single period model and Gaussian returns; in this Chapter, we shall drop these assumptions
More informationSmoothed Analysis of Binary Search Trees
Smoothed Analysis of Binary Search Trees Bodo Manthey and Rüdiger Reischuk Universität zu Lübeck, Institut für Theoretische Informatik Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538 Lübeck, Germany manthey/reischuk@tcs.uni-luebeck.de
More informationGlobal Joint Distribution Factorizes into Local Marginal Distributions on Tree-Structured Graphs
Teaching Note October 26, 2007 Global Joint Distribution Factorizes into Local Marginal Distributions on Tree-Structured Graphs Xinhua Zhang Xinhua.Zhang@anu.edu.au Research School of Information Sciences
More informationLevin Reduction and Parsimonious Reductions
Levin Reduction and Parsimonious Reductions The reduction R in Cook s theorem (p. 266) is such that Each satisfying truth assignment for circuit R(x) corresponds to an accepting computation path for M(x).
More informationCMPSCI 311: Introduction to Algorithms Second Midterm Practice Exam SOLUTIONS
CMPSCI 311: Introduction to Algorithms Second Midterm Practice Exam SOLUTIONS November 17, 2016. Name: ID: Instructions: Answer the questions directly on the exam pages. Show all your work for each question.
More informationTHE NUMBER OF UNARY CLONES CONTAINING THE PERMUTATIONS ON AN INFINITE SET
THE NUMBER OF UNARY CLONES CONTAINING THE PERMUTATIONS ON AN INFINITE SET MICHAEL PINSKER Abstract. We calculate the number of unary clones (submonoids of the full transformation monoid) containing the
More information1. INTRODUCTION Often nancial institutions are faced with liability streams which the cost of not meeting is large. There are many examples. Lack of m
INFINITE-HORIZON OPTIMAL HEDGING UNDER CONE CONSTRAINTS by KEVIN IAODONG HUANG Department of Economics, Utah State University, 3530 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322-3530, U.S.A., 435-797-2320 (o), 435-797-2701
More informationCook s Theorem: the First NP-Complete Problem
Cook s Theorem: the First NP-Complete Problem Theorem 37 (Cook (1971)) sat is NP-complete. sat NP (p. 113). circuit sat reduces to sat (p. 284). Now we only need to show that all languages in NP can be
More informationmonotone circuit value
monotone circuit value A monotone boolean circuit s output cannot change from true to false when one input changes from false to true. Monotone boolean circuits are hence less expressive than general circuits.
More informationMaximizing the Spread of Influence through a Social Network Problem/Motivation: Suppose we want to market a product or promote an idea or behavior in
Maximizing the Spread of Influence through a Social Network Problem/Motivation: Suppose we want to market a product or promote an idea or behavior in a society. In order to do so, we can target individuals,
More informationChapter 16. Binary Search Trees (BSTs)
Chapter 16 Binary Search Trees (BSTs) Search trees are tree-based data structures that can be used to store and search for items that satisfy a total order. There are many types of search trees designed
More information2 Deduction in Sentential Logic
2 Deduction in Sentential Logic Though we have not yet introduced any formal notion of deductions (i.e., of derivations or proofs), we can easily give a formal method for showing that formulas are tautologies:
More informationBAYESIAN GAMES: GAMES OF INCOMPLETE INFORMATION
BAYESIAN GAMES: GAMES OF INCOMPLETE INFORMATION MERYL SEAH Abstract. This paper is on Bayesian Games, which are games with incomplete information. We will start with a brief introduction into game theory,
More informationThe illustrated zoo of order-preserving functions
The illustrated zoo of order-preserving functions David Wilding, February 2013 http://dpw.me/mathematics/ Posets (partially ordered sets) underlie much of mathematics, but we often don t give them a second
More informationOn the Number of Permutations Avoiding a Given Pattern
On the Number of Permutations Avoiding a Given Pattern Noga Alon Ehud Friedgut February 22, 2002 Abstract Let σ S k and τ S n be permutations. We say τ contains σ if there exist 1 x 1 < x 2
More information6 -AL- ONE MACHINE SEQUENCING TO MINIMIZE MEAN FLOW TIME WITH MINIMUM NUMBER TARDY. Hamilton Emmons \,«* Technical Memorandum No. 2.
li. 1. 6 -AL- ONE MACHINE SEQUENCING TO MINIMIZE MEAN FLOW TIME WITH MINIMUM NUMBER TARDY f \,«* Hamilton Emmons Technical Memorandum No. 2 May, 1973 1 il 1 Abstract The problem of sequencing n jobs on
More informationTableau-based Decision Procedures for Hybrid Logic
Tableau-based Decision Procedures for Hybrid Logic Gert Smolka Saarland University Joint work with Mark Kaminski HyLo 2010 Edinburgh, July 10, 2010 Gert Smolka (Saarland University) Decision Procedures
More informationQ1. [?? pts] Search Traces
CS 188 Spring 2010 Introduction to Artificial Intelligence Midterm Exam Solutions Q1. [?? pts] Search Traces Each of the trees (G1 through G5) was generated by searching the graph (below, left) with a
More informationTug of War Game. William Gasarch and Nick Sovich and Paul Zimand. October 6, Abstract
Tug of War Game William Gasarch and ick Sovich and Paul Zimand October 6, 2009 To be written later Abstract Introduction Combinatorial games under auction play, introduced by Lazarus, Loeb, Propp, Stromquist,
More informationUPWARD STABILITY TRANSFER FOR TAME ABSTRACT ELEMENTARY CLASSES
UPWARD STABILITY TRANSFER FOR TAME ABSTRACT ELEMENTARY CLASSES JOHN BALDWIN, DAVID KUEKER, AND MONICA VANDIEREN Abstract. Grossberg and VanDieren have started a program to develop a stability theory for
More informationMAT25 LECTURE 10 NOTES. = a b. > 0, there exists N N such that if n N, then a n a < ɛ
MAT5 LECTURE 0 NOTES NATHANIEL GALLUP. Algebraic Limit Theorem Theorem : Algebraic Limit Theorem (Abbott Theorem.3.3) Let (a n ) and ( ) be sequences of real numbers such that lim n a n = a and lim n =
More informationFundamental Algorithms - Surprise Test
Technische Universität München Fakultät für Informatik Lehrstuhl für Effiziente Algorithmen Dmytro Chibisov Sandeep Sadanandan Winter Semester 007/08 Sheet Model Test January 16, 008 Fundamental Algorithms
More informationGUESSING MODELS IMPLY THE SINGULAR CARDINAL HYPOTHESIS arxiv: v1 [math.lo] 25 Mar 2019
GUESSING MODELS IMPLY THE SINGULAR CARDINAL HYPOTHESIS arxiv:1903.10476v1 [math.lo] 25 Mar 2019 Abstract. In this article we prove three main theorems: (1) guessing models are internally unbounded, (2)
More information6: MULTI-PERIOD MARKET MODELS
6: MULTI-PERIOD MARKET MODELS Marek Rutkowski School of Mathematics and Statistics University of Sydney Semester 2, 2016 M. Rutkowski (USydney) 6: Multi-Period Market Models 1 / 55 Outline We will examine
More informationLecture 5: Tuesday, January 27, Peterson s Algorithm satisfies the No Starvation property (Theorem 1)
Com S 611 Spring Semester 2015 Advanced Topics on Distributed and Concurrent Algorithms Lecture 5: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 Instructor: Soma Chaudhuri Scribe: Nik Kinkel 1 Introduction This lecture covers
More informationBest response cycles in perfect information games
P. Jean-Jacques Herings, Arkadi Predtetchinski Best response cycles in perfect information games RM/15/017 Best response cycles in perfect information games P. Jean Jacques Herings and Arkadi Predtetchinski
More informationMaximum Contiguous Subsequences
Chapter 8 Maximum Contiguous Subsequences In this chapter, we consider a well-know problem and apply the algorithm-design techniques that we have learned thus far to this problem. While applying these
More informationLecture Notes 1
4.45 Lecture Notes Guido Lorenzoni Fall 2009 A portfolio problem To set the stage, consider a simple nite horizon problem. A risk averse agent can invest in two assets: riskless asset (bond) pays gross
More informationTrade Agreements as Endogenously Incomplete Contracts
Trade Agreements as Endogenously Incomplete Contracts Henrik Horn (Research Institute of Industrial Economics, Stockholm) Giovanni Maggi (Princeton University) Robert W. Staiger (Stanford University and
More informationThe Binomial Model. Chapter 3
Chapter 3 The Binomial Model In Chapter 1 the linear derivatives were considered. They were priced with static replication and payo tables. For the non-linear derivatives in Chapter 2 this will not work
More informationBrief Notes on the Category Theoretic Semantics of Simply Typed Lambda Calculus
University of Cambridge 2017 MPhil ACS / CST Part III Category Theory and Logic (L108) Brief Notes on the Category Theoretic Semantics of Simply Typed Lambda Calculus Andrew Pitts Notation: comma-separated
More informationLecture 14: Basic Fixpoint Theorems (cont.)
Lecture 14: Basic Fixpoint Theorems (cont) Predicate Transformers Monotonicity and Continuity Existence of Fixpoints Computing Fixpoints Fixpoint Characterization of CTL Operators 1 2 E M Clarke and E
More informationOnline Shopping Intermediaries: The Strategic Design of Search Environments
Online Supplemental Appendix to Online Shopping Intermediaries: The Strategic Design of Search Environments Anthony Dukes University of Southern California Lin Liu University of Central Florida February
More informationSemantics with Applications 2b. Structural Operational Semantics
Semantics with Applications 2b. Structural Operational Semantics Hanne Riis Nielson, Flemming Nielson (thanks to Henrik Pilegaard) [SwA] Hanne Riis Nielson, Flemming Nielson Semantics with Applications:
More informationCTL Model Checking. Goal Method for proving M sat σ, where M is a Kripke structure and σ is a CTL formula. Approach Model checking!
CMSC 630 March 13, 2007 1 CTL Model Checking Goal Method for proving M sat σ, where M is a Kripke structure and σ is a CTL formula. Approach Model checking! Mathematically, M is a model of σ if s I = M
More informationLecture 23: April 10
CS271 Randomness & Computation Spring 2018 Instructor: Alistair Sinclair Lecture 23: April 10 Disclaimer: These notes have not been subjected to the usual scrutiny accorded to formal publications. They
More informationThe potential function φ for the amortized analysis of an operation on Fibonacci heap at time (iteration) i is given by the following equation:
Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and Manufacturing, Kancheepuram Chennai 600 127, India An Autonomous Institute under MHRD, Govt of India http://www.iiitdm.ac.in COM 01 Advanced Data Structures
More information