The Boolean Pythagorean triples problem is a problem from Ramsey theory about whether the positive integers can be colored red and blue so that no Pythagorean triples consist of all red or all blue members. The Boolean Pythagorean triples problem was solved by Marijn Heule, Oliver Kullmann and Victor W. Marek in May 2016 through a computer-assisted proof. [1]
The problem asks if it is possible to color each of the positive integers either red or blue, so that no Pythagorean triple of integers a, b, c, satisfying are all the same color.
For example, in the Pythagorean triple 3, 4 and 5 (), if 3 and 4 are colored red, then 5 must be colored blue.
Marijn Heule, Oliver Kullmann and Victor W. Marek showed that such a coloring is only possible up to the number 7824. The actual statement of the theorem proved is
Theorem — The set {1, . . . , 7824} can be partitioned into two parts, such that no part contains a Pythagorean triple, while this is impossible for {1, . . . , 7825}. [2]
There are 27825 ≈ 3.63×102355 possible coloring combinations for the numbers up to 7825. These possible colorings were logically and algorithmically narrowed down to around a trillion (still highly complex) cases, and those were examined using a Boolean satisfiability solver. Creating the proof took about 4 CPU-years of computation over a period of two days on the Stampede supercomputer at the Texas Advanced Computing Center and generated a 200 terabyte propositional proof, which was compressed to 68 gigabytes.
The paper describing the proof was published in the SAT 2016 conference, [2] where it won the best paper award. [3] The figure below shows a possible family of colorings for the set {1,...,7824} with no monochromatic Pythagorean triple, and the white squares can be colored either red or blue while still satisfying this condition.
In the 1980s Ronald Graham offered a $100 prize for the solution of the problem, which has now been awarded to Marijn Heule. [1]
As of 2018, the problem is still open for more than 2 colors, that is, if there exists a k-coloring (k ≥ 3) of the positive integers such that no Pythagorean triples are the same color. [4]
In logic and computer science, the Boolean satisfiability problem is the problem of determining if there exists an interpretation that satisfies a given Boolean formula. In other words, it asks whether the variables of a given Boolean formula can be consistently replaced by the values TRUE or FALSE in such a way that the formula evaluates to TRUE. If this is the case, the formula is called satisfiable. On the other hand, if no such assignment exists, the function expressed by the formula is FALSE for all possible variable assignments and the formula is unsatisfiable. For example, the formula "a AND NOT b" is satisfiable because one can find the values a = TRUE and b = FALSE, which make = TRUE. In contrast, "a AND NOT a" is unsatisfiable.
The P versus NP problem is a major unsolved problem in theoretical computer science. In informal terms, it asks whether every problem whose solution can be quickly verified can also be quickly solved.
In computer science, 2-satisfiability, 2-SAT or just 2SAT is a computational problem of assigning values to variables, each of which has two possible values, in order to satisfy a system of constraints on pairs of variables. It is a special case of the general Boolean satisfiability problem, which can involve constraints on more than two variables, and of constraint satisfaction problems, which can allow more than two choices for the value of each variable. But in contrast to those more general problems, which are NP-complete, 2-satisfiability can be solved in polynomial time.
In computational complexity theory, the Cook–Levin theorem, also known as Cook's theorem, states that the Boolean satisfiability problem is NP-complete. That is, it is in NP, and any problem in NP can be reduced in polynomial time by a deterministic Turing machine to the Boolean satisfiability problem.
In computational complexity theory, a function problem is a computational problem where a single output is expected for every input, but the output is more complex than that of a decision problem. For function problems, the output is not simply 'yes' or 'no'.
In computational complexity theory, Karp's 21 NP-complete problems are a set of computational problems which are NP-complete. In his 1972 paper, "Reducibility Among Combinatorial Problems", Richard Karp used Stephen Cook's 1971 theorem that the boolean satisfiability problem is NP-complete to show that there is a polynomial time many-one reduction from the boolean satisfiability problem to each of 21 combinatorial and graph theoretical computational problems, thereby showing that they are all NP-complete. This was one of the first demonstrations that many natural computational problems occurring throughout computer science are computationally intractable, and it drove interest in the study of NP-completeness and the P versus NP problem.
A computer-assisted proof is a mathematical proof that has been at least partially generated by computer.
In computer science, in particular in knowledge representation and reasoning and metalogic, the area of automated reasoning is dedicated to understanding different aspects of reasoning. The study of automated reasoning helps produce computer programs that allow computers to reason completely, or nearly completely, automatically. Although automated reasoning is considered a sub-field of artificial intelligence, it also has connections with theoretical computer science and philosophy.
Satplan is a method for automated planning. It converts the planning problem instance into an instance of the Boolean satisfiability problem, which is then solved using a method for establishing satisfiability such as the DPLL algorithm or WalkSAT.
MAX-3SAT is a problem in the computational complexity subfield of computer science. It generalises the Boolean satisfiability problem (SAT) which is a decision problem considered in complexity theory. It is defined as:
In computational complexity theory, the maximum satisfiability problem (MAX-SAT) is the problem of determining the maximum number of clauses, of a given Boolean formula in conjunctive normal form, that can be made true by an assignment of truth values to the variables of the formula. It is a generalization of the Boolean satisfiability problem, which asks whether there exists a truth assignment that makes all clauses true.
In computer science and mathematical logic, satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) is the problem of determining whether a mathematical formula is satisfiable. It generalizes the Boolean satisfiability problem (SAT) to more complex formulas involving real numbers, integers, and/or various data structures such as lists, arrays, bit vectors, and strings. The name is derived from the fact that these expressions are interpreted within ("modulo") a certain formal theory in first-order logic with equality. SMT solvers are tools which aim to solve the SMT problem for a practical subset of inputs. SMT solvers such as Z3 and cvc5 have been used as a building block for a wide range of applications across computer science, including in automated theorem proving, program analysis, program verification, and software testing.
In computational complexity theory, a gadget is a subset of a problem instance that simulates the behavior of one of the fundamental units of a different computational problem. Gadgets are typically used to construct reductions from one computational problem to another, as part of proofs of NP-completeness or other types of computational hardness. The component design technique is a method for constructing reductions by using gadgets.
In computer science and formal methods, a SAT solver is a computer program which aims to solve the Boolean satisfiability problem. On input a formula over Boolean variables, such as "(x or y) and ", a SAT solver outputs whether the formula is satisfiable, meaning that there are possible values of x and y which make the formula true, or unsatisfiable, meaning that there are no such values of x and y. In this case, the formula is satisfiable when x is true, so the solver should return "satisfiable". Since the introduction of algorithms for SAT in the 1960s, modern SAT solvers have grown into complex software artifacts involving a large number of heuristics and program optimizations to work efficiently.
In mathematical logic, a formula is satisfiable if it is true under some assignment of values to its variables. For example, the formula is satisfiable because it is true when and , while the formula is not satisfiable over the integers. The dual concept to satisfiability is validity; a formula is valid if every assignment of values to its variables makes the formula true. For example, is valid over the integers, but is not.
In computational complexity theory, the exponential time hypothesis is an unproven computational hardness assumption that was formulated by Impagliazzo & Paturi (1999). It states that satisfiability of 3-CNF Boolean formulas cannot be solved more quickly than exponential time in the worst case. The exponential time hypothesis, if true, would imply that P ≠ NP, but it is a stronger statement. It implies that many computational problems are equivalent in complexity, in the sense that if one of them has a subexponential time algorithm then they all do, and that many known algorithms for these problems have optimal or near-optimal time complexity.
7825 is the natural number following 7824 and preceding 7826.
In computational complexity, not-all-equal 3-satisfiability (NAE3SAT) is an NP-complete variant of the Boolean satisfiability problem, often used in proofs of NP-completeness.
Marienus Johannes Hendrikus Heule is a Dutch computer scientist at Carnegie Mellon University who studies SAT solvers. Heule has used these solvers to resolve mathematical conjectures such as the Boolean Pythagorean triples problem, Schur's theorem number 5, and Keller's conjecture in dimension seven.
