Model Counting for Dependency Quantified Boolean Formulas
Long-Hin Fung, Che Cheng, Jie-Hong Roland Jiang, Friedrich Slivovsky, Tony Tan

TL;DR
This paper explores the complexity of model counting for Dependency Quantified Boolean Formulas (DQBF), establishing theoretical hardness results and developing a specialized model counter that outperforms baseline methods on larger instances.
Contribution
It proves #2-DQBF is #EXP-complete, extending classical results, and introduces a dedicated model counter that scales better for complex dependencies.
Findings
#2-DQBF is #EXP-complete, matching classical complexity results.
The dedicated model counter outperforms propositional expansion methods on larger instances.
First-order model counting remains #EXP-complete even in restricted fragments.
Abstract
Dependency Quantified Boolean Formulas (DQBF) generalize QBF by explicitly specifying which universal variables each existential variable depends on, instead of relying on a linear quantifier order. The satisfiability problem of DQBF is NEXP-complete, and many hard problems can be succinctly encoded as DQBF. Recent work has revealed a strong analogy between DQBF and SAT: k-DQBF (with k existential variables) is a succinct form of k-SAT, and satisfiability is NEXP-complete for 3-DQBF but PSPACE-complete for 2-DQBF, mirroring the complexity gap between 3-SAT (NP-complete) and 2-SAT (NL-complete). Motivated by this analogy, we study the model counting problem for DQBF, denoted #DQBF. Our main theoretical result is that #2-DQBF is #EXP-complete, where #EXP is the exponential-time analogue of #P. This parallels Valiant's classical theorem stating that #2-SAT is #P-complete. As a direct…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
Taxonomy
TopicsFormal Methods in Verification · Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge · Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
