Lower Bounds for QBFs of Bounded Treewidth
Johannes Klaus Fichte, Markus Hecher, Andreas Pfandler
Abstract
The problem of deciding the validity (QSat) of quantified Boolean formulas (QBF) is a vivid research area in both theory and practice. In the field of parameterized algorithmics, the well-studied graph measure treewidth turned out to be a successful parameter. A well-known result by Chen [10] is that QSat when parameterized by the treewidth of the primal graph and the quantifier rank of the input formula is fixedparameter tractable. More precisely, the runtime of such an algorithm is polynomial in the formula size and exponential in the treewidth, where the exponential function in the treewidth is a tower, whose height is the quantifier rank. A natural question is whether one can significantly improve these results and decrease the tower while assuming the Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH). In the last years, there has been a growing interest in the quest of establishing lower bounds under ETH, showing mostly problem-specific lower bounds up to the third level of the polynomial hierarchy. Still, an important question is to settle this as general as possible and to cover the whole polynomial hierarchy. In this work, we show lower bounds based on the ETH for arbitrary QBFs parameterized by treewidth and quantifier rank. More formally, we establish lower bounds for QSat and treewidth, namely, that under ETH there cannot be an algorithm that solves QSat of quantifier rank i in runtime significantly better than i-fold exponential in the treewidth and polynomial in the input size. In doing so, we provide a reduction technique to compress treewidth that encodes dynamic programming on arbitrary tree decompositions. Further, we describe a general methodology for a more fine-grained analysis of problems parameterized by treewidth that are at higher levels of the polynomial hierarchy. Finally, we illustrate the usefulness of our results by discussing various applications of our results to problems that are located higher on the polynomial hierarchy, in particular, various problems from the literature such as projected model counting problems.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 2d2429a8-7957-4627-8fbd-34f61ca70f6aCited by top-tier papers5
- Knowledge-Base Degrees of Inconsistency: Complexity and CountingJohannes Klaus Fichte, Markus Hecher, Arne MeierAAAI 2021 · 5 citations
- Structure-Aware Lower Bounds and Broadening the Horizon of Tractability for QBFJohannes Klaus Fichte, Robert Ganian, Markus Hecher, Friedrich Slivovsky et al.LICS 2023 · 4 citations
- Characterizing Structural Hardness of Logic Programs: What Makes Cycles and Reachability Hard for Treewidth?Markus HecherAAAI 2023 · 2 citations
- Structure-Aware Encodings of Argumentation Properties for Clique-widthYasir Mahmood, Markus Hecher, Johanna Groven, Johannes Klaus FichteAAAI 2026
- On the Structural Hardness of Answer Set Programming: Can Structure Efficiently Confine the Power of Disjunctions?Markus Hecher, Rafael KieselAAAI 2024
Builds on1
Related papers
- Treewidth Inapproximability and Tight ETH Lower BoundÉdouard BonnetSTOC 2025 · 1 citation
- Fine-Grained Bounds for Courcelle's TheoremDaniel Lokshtanov, Fahad Panolan, Saket Saurabh, Jie Xue et al.STOC 2026
- From Width-Based Model Checking to Width-Based Automated Theorem ProvingMateus de Oliveira Oliveira, Farhad VadieeAAAI 2023 · 3 citations
- Gateways to Tractability for Satisfiability in Pearl’s Causal HierarchyRobert Ganian, Marlene Gründel, Simon WiethegerICML 2026
- Treewidth-Aware Complexity in ASP: Not all Positive Cycles are Equally HardJorge Fandinno, Markus HecherAAAI 2021 · 10 citations
