Heavy-Tailed Phenomena in Satisfiability and Constraint Satisfaction Problems

Gomes, C. P., Selman, B., Crato, N., & Kautz, H. (2000). Heavy-Tailed Phenomena in Satisfiability and Constraint Satisfaction Problems. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 24(1), 1-2.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

2000

Volume

24

Issue

1

Pages

1-2

DOI

10.1023/a:1006314320276

DOI registrant

Springer Nature

Link

https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006314320276

Cited from

computer_science

Cited by

1 citation across 1 artifact.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Backtracking
  • Recognising the pattern enables reasoning about completeness-versus-speed trade-offs: a backtracking search is complete when the tree is finite and every branch is eventually tried, and relaxing completeness — through depth limits or randomised restarts — trades coverage for speed, the same trade that structures search in time-boxed negotiation and triaged debugging.

    This sourceEstablishes randomized restarts as a way to trade completeness coverage for expected speed in backtracking search.

    Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract

    The abstract credits rapid restart strategies in backtracking search with significantly reducing expected solution time, but never states that restarts give up completeness, nor anything about negotiation or debugging.

    “We also show how random restarts can effectively eliminate heavy-tailed behavior. Furthermore, for harder problem instances, we observe long tails on the left-hand side of the distribution, which is indicative of a non-negligible fraction of relatively short, successful runs. A rapid restart strategy eliminates heavy-tailed behavior and takes advantage of short runs, significantly reducing expected solution time.”

    Read by an automated reader; not a human review. How support was checked

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:af05d4721b03 · see in the full table