Greedy Algorithms for the Maximum Satisfiability Problem: Simple Algorithms and Inapproximability Bounds
Matthias Poloczek,Georg Schnitger,David P. Williamson,Anke van Zuylen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1137/15m1053369
2017-01-01
SIAM Journal on Computing
Abstract:We give a simple, randomized greedy algorithm for the maximum satisfiability problem (MAX SAT) that obtains a $\frac{3}{4}$-approximation in expectation. In contrast to previously known $\frac{3}{4}$-approximation algorithms, our algorithm does not use flows or linear programming. Hence we provide a positive answer to a question posed by Williamson in 1998 on whether such an algorithm exists. Moreover, we show that Johnson's greedy algorithm cannot guarantee a $\frac{3}{4}$-approximation, even if the variables are processed in a random order. Thereby we partially solve a problem posed by Chen, Friesen, and Zheng in 1999. In order to explore the limitations of the greedy paradigm, we use the model of priority algorithms of Borodin, Nielsen, and Rackoff. Since our greedy algorithm works in an online scenario where the variables arrive with their set of undecided clauses, we wonder if a better approximation ratio can be obtained by further fine-tuning its random decisions. For a particular information model we show that no priority algorithm can approximate Online MAX SAT within $\frac{3}{4} + \varepsilon$ (for any $\varepsilon > 0$). We further investigate the strength of deterministic greedy algorithms that may choose the variable ordering. Here we show that no adaptive priority algorithm can achieve approximation ratio $\frac{3}{4}$. We propose two ways in which this inapproximability result can be bypassed. First we show that if our greedy algorithm is additionally given the variable assignments of an optimal solution to the canonical LP relaxation, then we can derandomize its decisions while preserving the overall approximation guarantee. Second we give a simple, deterministic algorithm that performs an additional pass over the input. We show that this 2-pass algorithm satisfies clauses with a total weight of at least $\frac{3}{4} {OPT}_{LP}$, where ${OPT}_{LP}$ is the objective value of the canonical linear program. Moreover, we demonstrate that our analysis is tight and detail how each pass can be implemented in linear time.
computer science, theory & methods,mathematics, applied