Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Exact Model Counting of Query Expressions: Limitations of Propositional Methods

Published: 03 February 2017 Publication History

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/.
[2]
Sheldon B. Akers. 1978. Binary decision diagrams. IEEE Trans. Comput. 27, 6 (1978), 509--516.
[3]
Fahiem Bacchus, Shannon Dalmao, and Toniann Pitassi. 2003. Algorithms and complexity results for #SAT and Bayesian inference. In FOCS. 340--351.
[4]
Roberto J. Bayardo, Jr., and J. D. Pehoushek. 2000. Counting models using connected components. In AAAI. 157--162.
[5]
Paul Beame, Russell Impagliazzo, Toniann Pitassi, and Nathan Segerlind. 2010. Formula caching in DPLL. ACM Trans. Comput. Theory 1, 3 (2010).
[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.
[7]
Paul Beame, Jerry Li, Sudeepa Roy, and Dan Suciu. 2013. Lower bounds for exact model counting and applications in probabilistic databases. In UAI.
[8]
Paul Beame, Jerry Li, Sudeepa Roy, and Dan Suciu. 2014. Counting of query expressions: Limitations of propositional methods. In ICDT. 177--188.
[9]
Paul Beame and Vincent Liew. 2015. New limits for knowledge compilation and applications to exact model counting. In UAI. 131--140.
[10]
Paul Beame, Guy Van den Broeck, Eric Gribkoff, and Dan Suciu. 2015. Symmetric weighted first-order model counting. In PODS. 313--328.
[11]
Eli Ben-Sasson and Avi Wigderson. 2001. Short proofs are narrow—Resolution made simple. J. ACM 48, 2 (Mar. 2001), 149--169.
[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.
[13]
Randal E. Bryant. 1986. Graph-based algorithms for boolean function manipulation. IEEE Trans. Comput. 35, 8 (1986), 677--691.
[14]
Nilesh N. Dalvi and Dan Suciu. 2012. The dichotomy of probabilistic inference for unions of conjunctive queries. J. ACM 59, 6 (2012), 30.
[15]
Adnan Darwiche. 2001a. Decomposable negation normal form. J. ACM 48, 4 (2001), 608--647.
[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.
[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.
[18]
Adnan Darwiche and Pierre Marquis. 2002. A knowledge compilation map. J. Artif. Int. Res. 17, 1 (Sept. 2002), 229--264.
[19]
Martin Davis, George Logemann, and Donald Loveland. 1962. A machine program for theorem-proving. Commun. ACM 5, 7 (1962), 394--397.
[20]
Martin Davis and Hilary Putnam. 1960. A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. ACM 7, 3 (1960), 201--215.
[21]
Pedro Domingos and Daniel Lowd. 2009. Markov Logic: An Interface Layer for Artificial Intelligence.
[22]
Carla P. Gomes, Ashish Sabharwal, and Bart Selman. 2009. Model counting. In Handbook of Satisfiability. IOS Press, 633--654.
[23]
Eric Gribkoff and Dan Suciu. 2016. SlimShot: In-database probabilistic inference for knowledge bases. Proc. VLDB 9, 7 (2016), 552--563.
[24]
Jinbo Huang and Adnan Darwiche. 2005. DPLL with a trace: From SAT to knowledge compilation. In IJCAI. 156--162.
[25]
Jinbo Huang and Adnan Darwiche. 2007. The language of search. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 29 (2007), 191--219.
[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.
[27]
Abhay Kumar Jha and Dan Suciu. 2011. Knowledge compilation meets database theory: Compiling queries to decision diagrams. In ICDT. 162--173.
[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.
[29]
Stephen M. Majercik and Michael L. Littman. 1998. Using caching to solve larger probabilistic planning problems. In AAAI. 954--959.
[30]
William Joseph Masek. 1976. A Fast Algorithm for the String Editing Problem and Decision Graph Complexity. Master’s thesis, MIT.
[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.
[32]
Igor Razgon. 2016. On the read-once property of branching programs and CNFs of bounded treewidth. Algorithmica 75, 2 (2016), 277--294.
[33]
Ashish Sabharwal. 2009. SymChaff: Exploiting symmetry in a structure-aware satisfiability solver. Constraints 14, 4 (2009), 478--505.
[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.
[35]
Richard P. Stanley. 1997. Enumerative Combinatorics. Cambridge University Press.
[36]
Dan Suciu, Dan Olteanu, Christopher Ré, and Christoph Koch. 2011. Probabilistic Databases. Morgan 8 Claypool.
[37]
Marc Thurley. 2006. sharpSAT: Counting models with advanced component caching and implicit BCP. In SAT. 424--429.
[38]
Leslie G. Valiant. 1979. The complexity of enumeration and reliability problems. SIAM J. Comput. 8, 3 (1979), 410--421.
[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.
[40]
Guy Van den Broeck, Wannes Meert, and Adnan Darwiche. 2014. Skolemization for weighted first-order model counting. In KR.
[41]
Ingo Wegener. 2000. Branching Programs and Binary Decision Diagrams: Theory and Applications. SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)A Compositional Approach to Probabilistic Knowledge CompilationInternational Journal of Approximate Reasoning10.1016/j.ijar.2021.07.007Online publication date: Aug-2021
  • (2020)Probabilistic Databases for AllProceedings of the 39th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems10.1145/3375395.3389129(19-31)Online publication date: 14-Jun-2020
  • (2020)Solving a Special Case of the Intensional vs Extensional Conjecture in Probabilistic DatabasesProceedings of the 39th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems10.1145/3375395.3387642(149-163)Online publication date: 14-Jun-2020
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

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
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: 03 February 2017
Accepted: 01 August 2016
Revised: 01 May 2016
Received: 01 February 2015
Published in TODS Volume 42, Issue 1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. DNNF
  2. FBDD
  3. Model counting
  4. knowledge compilation
  5. lower bounds
  6. probabilistic databases
  7. read-once branching programs

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)47
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
Reflects downloads up to 03 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)A Compositional Approach to Probabilistic Knowledge CompilationInternational Journal of Approximate Reasoning10.1016/j.ijar.2021.07.007Online publication date: Aug-2021
  • (2020)Probabilistic Databases for AllProceedings of the 39th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems10.1145/3375395.3389129(19-31)Online publication date: 14-Jun-2020
  • (2020)Solving a Special Case of the Intensional vs Extensional Conjecture in Probabilistic DatabasesProceedings of the 39th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems10.1145/3375395.3387642(149-163)Online publication date: 14-Jun-2020
  • (2019)Connecting Knowledge Compilation Classes Width ParametersTheory of Computing Systems10.1007/s00224-019-09930-2Online publication date: 10-Jun-2019
  • (2018)Recent advances in querying probabilistic knowledge basesProceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence10.5555/3304652.3304779(5420-5426)Online publication date: 13-Jul-2018
  • (2018)Uncertain Data LineageEncyclopedia of Database Systems10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_80759(4280-4286)Online publication date: 7-Dec-2018
  • (2017)Uncertain Data LineageEncyclopedia of Database Systems10.1007/978-1-4899-7993-3_80759-1(1-7)Online publication date: 19-Sep-2017

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media