2012
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-31612-8_30
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Perfect Hashing and CNF Encodings of Cardinality Constraints

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Well known and sophisticated encodings are the partial sum encoding [1], totalizer encoding [6], the sequential counter encoding [31], BDDs [13] or sorting networks [13], cardinality networks [5], as well as the perfect hashing encoding [9]. As shown in [26], these specialized encodings produce much smaller CNF formulas compared to the binomial encoding.…”
Section: Short Review Of Known Encodingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Well known and sophisticated encodings are the partial sum encoding [1], totalizer encoding [6], the sequential counter encoding [31], BDDs [13] or sorting networks [13], cardinality networks [5], as well as the perfect hashing encoding [9]. As shown in [26], these specialized encodings produce much smaller CNF formulas compared to the binomial encoding.…”
Section: Short Review Of Known Encodingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This can be explained as follows. If n = m 2 or n = m(m + 1), then ϕ p n (x) is given by (6). In this case, the size of the candidate for ϕ p n+1 (x) given by (6) is at least |ϕ Clearly, the size of ϕ p n is at most 3 + |ϕ p n−1 | which is the size of (5) and using this, one can prove by induction on n that for all n ≥ 3, we have…”
Section: Basic Size Estimatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover these two clauses are binary and the other literal in each of these clauses is on an auxiliary variable. The product encoding described by Chen [10] has this form, see also (6). The aim of this section is to show that if n is large enough and ϕ is a minimum size PCE of AMO * n which is not in regular form, then there is a PCE ϕ ′ of AMO * n−1 of size at most |ϕ| − 3.…”
Section: Reducing To Regular Formmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Encoding the BDD into CNF has been done by the Tseitin transformation. There are two small sized encodings for cardinality constraints that do not provide arc consistency: the parallel counter [29] and the hybrid perfect hashing function based encoding [46]. Although the properties of the latter are very nice, it cannot guarantee arc consistency for all possible cardinality constraints.…”
Section: The At-most-k Constraintmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the properties of the latter are very nice, it cannot guarantee arc consistency for all possible cardinality constraints. The arc consistent variant of perfect hashing function based encoding [46] uses slightly more clauses than the sequential counter, but needs less auxiliary variables. Since we focus on the number of clauses, we do not consider this encoding.…”
Section: The At-most-k Constraintmentioning
confidence: 99%